Is it OK to impose non-Canonical "dhutaṅgas" on junior monks?

but what precept or Vinaya rule it might have been in violation of? will you be confessing this transgression before the Sangha?

as far as concern with upsetting the institution goes, i’m not sure it’s the right and actually dhammic motivation behind actions

bhante, i noticed you frequently contrapose your way of life and duties to the lay people’s, why do you have to do this? it creates an impression of either elitism or dissatisfaction on your part

This brings up a very interesting (albeit somewhat problematic) discussion, one that may be worth having.

We are aware of the systems of power and corruption that monastics, and Buddhism in general have across the globe. This can be seen on a large scale in both Burma and Thailand through the tremendous political power the Sangha has over the government, and on a small scale through the steadfast traditionalism of Western Burmese and Thai lineages.

Thus, I think it’s tremendously important to confront/discuss such systems of power, and indeed the role of the Sangha in upholding tradition.

This may not be a conversation that is appropriate here or at this moment, so I’ll merely interject a question: when (or why) does challenging the doctrines/ideas upheld by certain traditions become an act of dissension?

4 Likes

do you mean act of dessension neutrally or as an act motivated by meanness with the aim of undermining harmony which (the harmony) rests on wholesome foundations?

I mean dissension that seeks as its goal the evolution/progression of traditional values, with the intention of positively furthering the Sangha.

I guess in some sense dissension might upset harmony. Though in this instance harmony might be defined as an equilibrium that hinders discussion and necessary change.

OK

such kind of harmony, which i think is rather based on suppression at the expense of one’s satisfaction than on genuine concord, just warrants upset

1 Like

Thanks Brenna. Agreed.

In the “Buddhist Monastic Code Vol. 1”, in the “Nissaya” chapter, on page 36, we see that one of the duties of a pupil to his teacher is:

2.c) “If the preceptor [or teacher] begins to hold to wrong views, the pupil should try to pry him away from those views or find someone else who can, or give him a Dhamma talk.”

This is a duty. There is a dukkata offense for not doing it. Having said this, tradition (or should I say, Confucianism?) would have it that it’s extremely taboo for a junior monk to correct a senior monk.

Also interesting is AN 5.106(6) “Ananda”:

At one time The Blessed One lived in the monastery offered by Gosita in Kosambi. Venerable Ānanda approached The Blessed One, worshipped, sat on a side, and said to The Blessed One: Venerable sir, is there a method for the Community of bhikkhus to have a pleasant abiding?

The Blessed One said: Ānanda, when the virtuous bhikkhu does not establish others in higher virtues, it is a pleasant abiding to the Community of bhikkhus.

Venerable sir, is there another method for the Community of bhikkhus to have a pleasant abiding?

The Blessed One said: There is. Ānanda, when the virtuous, internally concentrated bhikkhu does not establish others in higher virtues and establish them in internal concentration, it is a pleasant abiding to the Community of bhikkhus.

Venerable sir, is there another method for the Community of bhikkhus to have a pleasant abiding?

The Blessed One said: There is. Ānanda, when the virtuous, internally concentrated unknown bhikkhu does not establish others in higher virtues and establish them in internal concentration and does not grieve for his anonymity it is a pleasant abiding to the Community of bhikkhus. Venerable sir, is there another method for the Community of bhikkhus to have a pleasant abiding?

The Blessed One said: There is. Ānanda, when the virtuous, internally concentrated bhikkhu does not establish others in higher virtues or establish them in internal concentration, abides in the four higher states of the mind. The pleasant abidings here and now, gained for nothing, quickly and easily, it is a pleasant abiding to the Community of bhikkhus.

Venerable sir, is there another method for the Community of bhikkhus to have a pleasant abiding?

The Blessed One said: There is. Ānanda, when the virtuous, internally concentrated bhikkhu does not establish others in higher virtues or establish them in internal concentration, abides in the four higher states of the mind. The pleasant abidings here and now, gained for nothing, quickly and easily and destroying desires, releases the mind and released through wisdom abides here and now having realized, it is a pleasant abiding to the Community of bhikkhus. Ānanda, there is no other pleasant abiding, more noble and exalted than this.

What I take away from the above Sutta is this: sure you can have a harmonious Sangha, as long as you never correct any of the other monks and nuns around you. Yet from my first quotation from BMC1, correcting other monks and nuns is a duty which is a dukkata offense to not perform. It sucks when you are one of the few monks who takes this duty seriously.

So I think the Buddha knew that some turbulence is unavoidable to keep everyone respecting the Dhamma and Vinaya he taught throughout the ages, once he had pari-nibbana’ed. He wanted it respected exactly as he taught it: removing nothing, and adding nothing (as AN 4.180: “The Great References” clearly explains. It’s on page 545 of the Wisdom Publications Anguttara Nikaya).

It should also be noted that Ajahn Chah himself was a huge reformer of the Sangha (with a strong insistence on returning to and upholding vinaya rules, during a time when the Sangha of Thailand had become lax in this regard), and he is remembered as a hero for doing so.

I’m personally concerned that those reforming efforts went too far in the other direction, swinging from laxness, to self-mortification and asceticism (missing the “middle path” in between those two extremes).

3 Likes

This is exactly what the problem is. I’m convinced that in part the middle way should be arrived at through discussion, particularly by questioning the ‘status quo’ and relating canonical texts to broader issues (such as what you have done).

But I also think that change must come about through action at some stage, thereby disrupting harmony in the process. It’s a contentious issue - one that by no means has a definite answer - but one to be mindful of, nevertheless.

There’s no shortage of corruption in many sects in Sri Lanka as well. An obvious example would be how the caste system (that is to say, Brahmanism/Hinduism) has unfortunately intertwined itself with Buddhism there. Many Buddhist temples there officially have a caste. The monks at some given temple are of a certain caste, and the laypeople who attend that temple are also of that same certain caste. Surreal, but true!

Agreed.

I think the first necessary step for any concerned Buddhist is to actually read the Canonical Suttas and Vinaya (which is to say BMC 1 and 2, as well as the Bhukkhuni Vinaya). Note: never mind the Commentaries, at least not at first. IMHO, I think that in a number of cases those Commentaries do more harm than good, and need to be taken with a huge grain of salt.

Why? Because you unfortunately need to read all the Buddha’s teachings first-hand, before you can possibly discern what the Buddha DID NOT SAY. If you just rely on your local Senior monk to spoon-feed you cherry-picked Dhamma Talks, then I guarantee that the status quo will never change, because there will be so many Suttas (such as the ones I mentioned in this thread) that you will probably never otherwise hear. (BTW: The Anguttara Nikaya has lots of these hard-hitting Suttas, starting at about the 4’s, and upward. Highly recommended as a starting point).

Devoting about 20 minutes of Canonical reading a day should cover it all in about a year and a half, by my estimation. I’ve made one complete pass myself, and I’m on my second pass (maybe 20% through).

I think it’s only by using forums such as this one, and stringing together reasonable, rational, non-sensationalist, well-referenced-and-linked-to-Canonical-sources arguments together (minus any ill-will), that we have any hope to “cut 'da crap”, as it were. That’s how we can present convincing, hard-to-refute arguments (based on what the Buddha actually said) that will reach across the boundaries of cultures and ethnic traditions, and we’ll be much harder to dismiss out of hand, as merely expressing our own deluded opinions. It will also foster healthy debate, which the Buddha pointed out as a quality that a “Foremost Assembly” (from AN 2.46 “Ukkacita Sutta”) has:

"And which is the assembly trained in cross-questioning and not in bombast?

…when they have mastered that Dhamma, they cross-question one another about it and dissect it: ‘How is this? What is the meaning of this?’ They make open what isn’t open, make plain what isn’t plain, dispel doubt on its various doubtful points. This is called an assembly trained in cross-questioning and not in bombast."

Once decent arguments come together, in a forum such as this one (or, say, dhammawheel.com), then URLs pointing to those arguments can be emailed around to sympathetic parties (or posted on social media, etc).

It’s been my rather frustrating experience that:

  • Right-clicking a link
  • then left-clicking “Copy Link Location,” (in Firefox, anyway)
  • then pasting into an email

…unfortunately seems to be a skill that only Generation X and younger seems to get, but Baby Boomers seem to generally understand how to forward an email, once they receive one (containing a link).

I mention this, because Hyperlinking, and selectively, tactfully informing others can be a fairly powerful form of activism, IMHO.

I’d also like to acknowledge Bhante Khemaratana here, expressing my gratitude to him for convincing me to take up a regular Canonical sutta-reading habit. He has a website all about this here.

PS: way back in my early 20’s, I actually went to a fun party called “Cut 'Da Crap”. I mention this to make you laugh, and no other reason:

image

3 Likes

Dear Bhante Subharo and Brenna

I really appreciate the discussion you’ve both entered into here. Thank you for having it! It too is a part of the process of keeping things on the right track. By the way, didn’t the Buddha say somewhere, that we should not hold to traditions, just because they’re traditions? Also, I believe he said that we should have respect for traditions too… To me, this is saying that we should be kind and accepting and acknowledge that people find it hard to change…but at the same time, when something is worth challenging…ie…it promotes even more kindness, acceptance and acknowlegement of Truth…then it should be challenged.

I’ve also spotted another way of looking at this very interesting Sutta that Bhante Subharo has posted. If I may…

I think this is the key phrase…and then each subsequent section builds on this virtue in various cool :sunglasses: ways… The sort of awesomeness that us Buddhists with any degree of faith and desire to practise would love to experience!

I think this ties in with Bhante Subharo’s take which seems to suggest that we don’t correct others…because we should be looking inwards more, outwards less? Isn’t Ajahn Chah famously supposed to have said that we should look at ourselves 95% of the time and at others 5% of the time? To me the emphasis here is on cultivating and perfecting virtue and all the other wonderful things that are based on virtue as a foundation. But growing these things within ourselves…not looking too much to grow them in others. (Which doesn’t mean we forget about the 5% that Ajahn Chah suggested… I think for most of us though it’s closer to 95% at others and 5% at ourselves!)

However, the Buddha is famously reported to have told Ven. Ananda that good friendship is the whole of the holy life. Thus it seems to me that the presence of one good monastic, steady and confident in at least her practice of virtue, is enough to make everyone around them better than they might otherwise be…thus creating a nice environment to practice in.

I’m fortunate enough to count Bodhinyana Monastery as my “local”…and have had the chance to stay there many times. I’ve been visiting there for over 20 years. I’ve watched monks come and go and seen people change over the years in beautiful ways. I’ve also seen the place go from a very strict sort of setting to a more relaxed, open, accepting setting which gives almost anyone the chance to practice. To me, this is because kindness, virtue, forgiveness and meditation are valued above all else in this place…these things are fostered because the Abbot is an amazing role model for these things. Moreover, he’s inspired others to cultivate these things and so they inspire and encourage each other.

I think the Buddha’s teaching encourages us to keep to our virtue. But I believe the core of this virtue is compassion. I’ve heard Ajahn Brahm often say that the number one rule in his monastery is kindness. I’ve also heard him basically say that over the 40 odd years he’s been practising, it’s become clear that the Patimokkha is intended to be practised with compassion.

I think the Buddha’s teaching encourages us to see that the company we keep and the behaviour of that company, will impact our practice…afterall…we are just conditioned sponges…soaking up what is around us… The Buddha’s teaching makes this clear too. Indeed, I see this in my home. When others are practicing more, I do too. When I sit more, others are inspired to do so too. We are social beings. And monastics no different…they may be encouraged to be hermits…but they are still a community of hermits.

It must be hard, when you’ve gone forth out of faith and find that those around you are not encouraging the highest in you as you would wish them to. I wonder, in all seriousness, what the Buddha would advise? When I think of the Buddha, the word that comes to me is Compassion. Because compassion must first acknowledge and understand suffering. It’s deep and wise and it doesn’t hurt…it frees…if it’s real. Perhaps when with others, we aim to be compassionate and let them be? Perhaps when alone, we allow ourselves to be as we are…thus making it easier to practice…because we create a safe and compassionate mental space for ourselves. Thus we become, regardless of whether we are lay or monastic, man or woman, within ourselves, we become,

…we become that inspiration…even for ourselves.

I was talking to someone recently, struggling with her family life. Still caught up in what her parents and siblings will think of her…despite the fact that she’s closer to 70 than 20! I remember trying to remind her that the Buddha is reported to have said that “whatever you think it is, it’s always something different”. i.e…don’t trust your thoughts, your thinking so blindly. Her first response was something like, “oh, they don’t know what the Buddha said…” But that’s not the point. If the Dhamma works, it works because it is universal. It works everywhere and in every situation. If it doesn’t seem to be working, I think, it’s our own “fault”…because of our own delusion/blind spots…there’s something we’ve missed. Perhaps we’ve not got our sila right and aren’t kind enough? Perhaps we’ve not got our meditation right and we’re not still enough, not skilled enough in happy letting go? Perhaps our view is kinked in places we can’t see and our wisdom faculty is weaker than we know, perhaps it is encumbered by too much thinking? It’s my own fault if I don’t get it right…not in a sense of blaming myself…rather in a sense of accepting myself…that I’m just doing what I can and I’ll just have to keep at it and trust that someday, sometime, something’s gonna give. Because, good intentions don’t lead to hell (as that saying goes)…they lead to heaven, to happiness, to renunciation and peace. I remember a very good monk saying this many years ago…such a Buddhist way of looking at it. :slight_smile:

But if things aren’t perfect. And there’s little or nothing I can do…then the other thing at “fault”…is Suffering. Is Samsara… Lol…I guess, bringing samsara into it, just points to delusion again…so it goes back to being my “fault”…my responsibility. At the end of the day, I’ve got to look at myself. 95% of the time…like Ajahn Chah is supposed to have said. 'Am I being kind and virtous in my mind? 'Am I gentle and accepting of others? They can’t help it either…conditioned sponges that they are too! Do I let the right things go? How skilled 'am I at forgiving myself and others? Have I worked out what’s worth challenging and what’s worth letting go? These are the things I find myself grappling with…but it’s a fun grapple really…mostly :wink:

Sorry for the ramble…lol…can’t help it sometimes :slight_smile: Rather enjoyable “talking Dhamma” at times, isn’t it? :smile: I do apologise if I’ve inadvertently caused offense, misunderstood or missed the point somewhere along the way.

Anyway, I think you’re both…all…brilliant for wanting to have this discussion and for caring about something so important. Much mudita for your dedication and beautiful intentions. :pray:

5 Likes

:pray:

Dear Bhante @Subharo,

I completely agree with you that a Buddhist should read the canonical suttas on their own without too much dependency on the monastics to explain everything (because as you’ve mentioned, a person can be “fed” choice information from a knowledgeable monastic, unfortunately). From my experience at least, practicing bhavana and sutta studies complement each other. I’ve read the Tipitaka over once already and similarly I am on my second run.

I’ve also read the Vinaya for both monks and nuns. Interestingly, Ajahn Brahm always mention that lay people should read up and get acquainted with the suttas and Vinayas. He’s reiterated so many times that the only way to “control” unruly practices/habits within the sangha is to get lay people involved by taking away support. Because I volunteer as much as I am able at the local Lao Wat where I live, I can really see how much lay folks and monastics are symbiotically linked.

The only way that these issues can be solved is that the monastics who want to change such useless and harmful practices must have a solid backing from lay folks. But there are only a few lay folks that are serious about the practice and are really concerned for the sangha in the long term. From what I’ve seen at the Lao Wat, lay folks can be grouped in the following:

-Go there for the monthly “cultural” events to socialize (30%)
-Go there because of earning “boon” (30 %)
-Go there because it’s tradition (30%)
-Go there because they want to help (5 %)
-Go there because they want to really help and practice accordingly (5%)

The challenge really is how to get new generation to understand the Vinaya and empower them to have a mind set that upholding the Dhamma and supporting the sangha is not only through dana and providing requisites.

with respect and reverence,
russ

:pray:

4 Likes

This is a fantastic point and is something that Bhante Sujato discusses in this Dhamma talk: the role of the lay people as having the ability (and even potentially the duty) to promote change. For example, in the video Bhante talks about how many of the Vinaya rules were made because of complaints of the lay people.

In my overarching question I wasn’t even thinking about the lay people, but rather of monastics as the only people who could facilitate discussion. But you’re 100% right that the lay people are an essential component of the fourfold Sangha. Sadhu!

i found this site some time ago, didn’t know it belonged to a bhikkhu

i might err, but i believe in Buddhism regular scripture reading hasn’t been a traditional practice, and that’s due to scarcity of the translated Canon copies in use up until recently, so the idea is borrowed from Christianity, where it’s an obligation for the faithful

this is echoed in the Bhikkhuni sutta (AN 4.159)

This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said?

There is the case, sister, where a monk hears, ‘The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now.’ The thought occurs to him, ‘The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now. Then why not me?’ Then he eventually abandons conceit, having relied on conceit. ’

This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.’ Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said.

1 Like

I referred to this in my talk last night! (in Hamburg ATM). Thanks to all for this very interesting discussion!

On a not quite related point, @blake and @vimala and I discussed this morning ways of making SuttaCentral more accessible, and it was very fortuitous to see the link to Ven Khemaratana’s lovely site, Reading Faithfully. It has a very nice, carefully considered and reflective approach to encouraging and supporting sutta reading.

1 Like

Yes, the most common nikaya in Sri Lanka, the Siam Nikay, has caste-based ordination. It is no coincidence that Bhante Inamaluwe Sumangala, who broke ranks to do casteless ordination, later supported the ordination of bhikkhunis also.

1 Like

Very insightful. Thanks, @Russell.

He sort of said that. Perhaps what you were referring to was the Kalama Sutta:

“What do you think, Kalamas? When greed arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?”

“For harm, lord.”

“And this greedy person, overcome by greed, his mind possessed by greed, kills living beings, takes what is not given, goes after another person’s wife, tells lies, and induces others to do likewise, all of
which is for long-term harm & suffering.”

“Yes, lord.”

“Now, what do you think, Kalamas? When aversion arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?”

“For harm, lord.”

“And this aversive person, overcome by aversion, his mind possessed by aversion, kills living beings, takes what is not given, goes after another person’s wife, tells lies, and induces others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term harm & suffering.”

“Yes, lord.”

“Now, what do you think, Kalamas? When delusion arises in a person, does it arise for welfare or for harm?”

“For harm, lord.”

“And this deluded person, overcome by delusion, his mind possessed by delusion, kills living beings, takes what is not given, goes after another person’s wife, tells lies, and induces others to do likewise, all of which is for long-term harm & suffering.”

“Yes, lord.”

“So what do you think, Kalamas: Are these qualities skillful or unskillful?”

“Unskillful, lord.”

“Blameworthy or blameless?”

“Blameworthy, lord.”

“Criticized by the wise or praised by the wise?”

“Criticized by the wise, lord.”

“When adopted & carried out, do they lead to harm & to suffering, or not?”

“When adopted & carried out, they lead to harm & to suffering. That is how it appears to us.”

"So, as I said, Kalamas: ‘Don’t go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, “This contemplative is our teacher.” When you know for yourselves that, “These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering” — then you should abandon them.’ Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

That was a key phrase not to miss there: And in reference to this was it said. There are a couple of other places I recall where the Buddha actually recommends (or at least does not object to) following ancient traditions, which don’t even appear to be all that Buddhist, when they have the virtue of being helpful and wholesome somehow. One example is here.

So I think the take-away message here is that sometimes ancient traditions should be followed, and sometimes not, depending on how wholesome or wise those traditions are.

I think you are correct that ancient traditions should not be automatically assumed to be correct, and we should just follow them blindly, effectively lobotomizing the rational, logical parts of our brains.

1 Like

Dear LXNDR

That’s a very nice Sutta, thank you for sharing it. I agree with you that this is one way that someone can encourage others to practice…by being an inspiration. Although…lol…it sounds a bit like there’s almost a sense of competitiveness here! Kind of funny and sort of cute.

I was also thinking that a person who at least has very good virtue…creates a happy atmosphere. It’s generally safe and pleasant to be in such people’s company. Further, they almost seem to create a energy, or vibe and - like a cyclist being in another cyclist’s slipstream - one can hang out in that “energetic space” and get some mileage within that space - as the cyclist would. In very practical, real terms…it’s easier to be happy, easier to meditate in the presence of such people. Further, when that virtue has been added to…i.e…they’ve got awesome meditation and are super wise…that atmosphere or biosphere…or aura even…around them is even more potent.

It’s rather a glorious reflection. A biosphere made of love and peace…a field that others can enter into and get a boost, gain an insight, experience a transformation…that they otherwise might not so easily feel/see.

With metta

3 Likes

now i see why you don’t sit cross-legged while giving talks

2 Likes