To be sure, Bhante G kept his aspiration to follow the vinaya and did so as soon as he could. I love Ajahn Viradhammo’s stories about being the caretaker for his mother during the long illness that led to her death - which meant that he was breaking the rules about being alone with a woman and several others. He says he went ahead and did it because it was the compassionate thing to do, but he confessed it every fortnight because “the rules are the rules”.
6 Likes
I don’t know, looks like the negative opinion about monks smoking is largely culturally conditioned. The Venerable can also be seen chewing betelnut on videos of his sermons. A very nice examples of how our assumptions and expectations about Vinaya can be influenced by our cultural background.
3 Likes
Being the son and grandson of smokers (not a smoker myself) all I tend to see in this photo is a very (truly, maybe?) happy monk having a nice cigar!
If it was me however it would instead be a cup of icy cold coca cola or pepsi! Hehehe
1 Like
Cultural conditioning plays a part, but surely there must be some vinaya ruling on some substances that constitute sura meraya majja pamadatthana?
I’ve never smoked cigarettes, but it sure looks addictive from all I’ve seen. For that reason alone I’d question its use. I’m not happy about Ajahn Mun and some of the forest masters smoking cigarettes. It looks like weakness. Now they were able to do things that were far harder than not smoking, so I have no doubt they could stop smoking instantly if they wanted to. I’ve seen a few (but very rare) lay people with strong will power just stop cold turkey and never look back,
I’ve only studied the vinaya a little, but one thing that really struck me, and there are suttas that show this too, is that so many of the finicky little rules about when a monastic is allowed to give a dhamma talk, we can infer it’s because the Dhamma is treated with proper respect, like an object of holy veneration.
I once attended a Dhamma talk from Ajahn Brahm, where there were some Asian Theravadan Bhikkhus in attendance (maybe Thai, not sure). Not long into the talk, maybe 10 minutes, a cel phone rings, a guy answers and starts talking in normal conversation volume tone, and the conversation lasts for several minutes as I recall. Ajahn Brahm, made a quick joke comment about it, don’t remember what the joke was, but it might have had a gentle hint in there that talking on the cel phone loudly during a dhamma talk was not the most appropriate thing to do.
My eyes were riveted on Ajahn Brahm, and I didn’t know who was talking on the phone. I was listening to the Dhamma like a matter of vital concern, putting all my Samadhi into it, but after a few minutes, I’m wondering who the hell is this guy talking on the phone loudly during a dhamma talk?
It was an asian language unknown to me, but from the casual tone and duration of the talking that obviously was not an emergency.
I looked around the room to see who the talker was and saw it was one of the Theravadan Bhikkhus. Could not believe my eyes. In my mind I imagined if Ajahn Mun had been giving the talk, instead of Ajahn Brahm, he would have ripped that Bhikkhu a new one right there on the spot in public. Or at least some Dhamma protector would give an invisible but impressively loud smack upside the head of the offender, launching the phone across the wall causing it to be smashed to bits. Sadly none of those 2 things happened. I thought about saying something myself afterwards, or even right there during the dhamma talk voicing my displeasure, but I kept my silence and didn’t make an issue about it.
In hindsight, I regret my inactions. By tolerating this kind of behavior it just encourages this to become the norm.
2 Likes
I wouldn’t want to condone such actions, but the ubiquitous use of high-volume PA systems in Asia (and often in Asian communities here) “elimiates” the problem of people talking (on the phone or to each other) by drowning them out… 
I think in what concerns the betelnut and tobacco this is all very individual and varies from monastery to monasters. In Luang Ta Maha Bua’s tradition it is probably more tolerated than in Ajahn Chah’s - but Ven. Maha Bua took Vinaya very seriously.
2 Likes
does this rule apply to mothers (parents)? although such level of moral depravity is not impossible, generally any romantic intimacy with close relatives is taboo by default and so doesn’t require specific emphasis or regulation
stuff to smoke, drink, chew and whatnot to pass time isn’t one of the 4 requisites for a monk and in fact a luxury, excess and vanity for one, i don’t think it’s a fair way of using donors’ generosity and resources
for basic manners one doesn’t really need any Vinaya, just everyday civility and consideration, compassion for nibbana sake
1 Like
I agree. I think for most of us it is. I think for most of the stricter Thai monks it is. However, Luang Ta Maha Bua and his lay supporters had a different opinion about it and his tradition has way higher Vinaya standards than an average Thai monastery, at least in the past. We can have differing opinions about whether Venerable Maha Bua was enlightened but he was and his desciples are certainly very dedicated monks fully committed to the Dhamma, meditating for tens of hours (I remember talks by Ven. Piyadhammo about his early experiences in Ven. Maha Bua’s monastery). Of course, one could criticize these venerable monks for smoking, but I’d say it is not a reason to stop supporting them altogether.
The rules don’t make an exception for mothers or other immediate family members, but most interpretations do. I don’t think anyone is expecting depravity, but rather family entanglement that would be distracting. I think Ajahn Viradhammo talks quite a bit about how meeting the challenges that life places on you can BE the path rather than a distraction - if you use them that way.
Everyone has to be taught what everyday civility and consideration looks like, and it seems to be very very different from one family to another, let alone from one place to another. I have had lots of practice watching my mind get upset at the obvious disrespect some people show, only to realize that they mean no disrespect at all. 
Actually I think a lot of the minor rules like not smacking your lips when you eat are attempts to teach a uniform set of manners to the monks so they wouldn’t be an embarrassment in formal situations.
Hi everyone ,
Will a comparative version of the vinaya pitaka be helpful ? ( a vinaya pitaka compiled by analyzing the vinaya rules in various sects of buddhism such as theravada, sarvastivada,mahisasaka etc.) Will this be a possible and an affective approach ?
thanks ,
With metta.
At one time, thinking he would avoid an offense, a monk had sexual intercourse with his mother … had sexual intercourse with his daughter … had sexual intercourse with his sister. … He became remorseful … “You’ve committed an offense entailing expulsion.”
This gives you an idea of how back then things were NOT better than today!
https://suttacentral.net/en/pi-tv-bu-vb-pj1
At one time, a monk touched his mother out of affection". He became remorseful, thinking, “The Master has laid down a training rule. Could it be that I’ve committed an offense entailing suspension?” He informed the Master, and the Master said, “There’s no offense entailing suspension, but there’s an offense of wrong conduct.”
At one time, a monk touched his daughter out of affection … his sister out of affection. He became remorseful … “There’s no offense entailing suspension, but there’s an offense of wrong conduct.”
2 Likes
Just to give an arithmetical context to the story, in Thailand alone it is estimated that at least 300,000 long term monastics exist.
The suggested 5% share of which could be considered to strictly adhere to the rules means there are some 15,000 bhikkhus making the effort of not getting involved with the taking up of money.
It is important to acknowledge that Thai people and Thai Sangha are usually very generous and understanding when it comes to people who find themselves unable to sustain the practice and keep up with the contemplative livelihood. If you cannot do it just leave it - as long as you don’t do anything really bad before you leave and don’t change your mind too many times the door always remain open for you to try again. 
The usual problems and controversies tend to occur in either the extremes of fame and prestige - i.e. when monks get old and famous, surrounded by equally aging and affluent disciples eager to buy a ticket to Nibbana! 
- or the extreme of abandonment and lack of guidance - when monks end up isolated and orbiting already problematic communities, and either become sorcerers / amulet makers, or crazy guns and knife collectors 
.
In my many years of occasional interactions with the Thai Sangha, (mostly within Dhammayut sect) it has become very clear to me that there’s an important mutual shaping of the Bhikkhu Sangha by the laity (Parisa) supporting and attending it.
Like a chicken and egg dilemma, I don’t think anyone can say what comes first : a good Sangha or a good Parisa (community of lay supporters).
And I don’t think it has to do with knowledge of Suttas or Vinaya, but instead is all about a sincere, genuine and realistic approach to the challenge of preserving and keeping alive of what the Buddha categorically defined as right livelihood and identifed as being the most fruitful way spiritual practice, as beautifully explained in the DN2.
The Sangha as a refuge and institution should be understood above all as a beautiful way to preserve a culture of renunciation, faith/conviction, right effort.
Those outside should cherish those inside really taking up the challenge and progressing, and those inside should Inspire themselves with the beautiful example of compassion, patience and comprehension left by the Buddha in the way he came up with the Vinaya as the problems arose.
In fact, that’s the reason why probably originally matters of the Sangha and the exact details about the rules seem to have been kept to the members of the Sangha (as the 2,100 years old records of the conversation between Nagasena and Milinda suggests).
Where you get people who sometimes barely can keep up themselves with five percepts criticizing those trying to keep up with the challenging endeavour of a truly contemplative lifestyle, you are about to enter a very negative and downward spiral: lack of generosity is justified and a living legacy of right livelihood is gradually lost and abandoned.
10 Likes
Like a chicken and egg dilemma, I don’t think anyone can say what comes first : a good Sangha or a good Parisa (community of lay supporters).
Maybe you have a good point here but on the other hand, in the Canki sutta the Buddha said “…….If faith in a teacher does not arise, one will not visit him; but because faith in a teacher arises, one visits him. … “
If I see the monks or nuns who’s very lax in keeping Vinaya, immediately I have …”a little doubt” in his /her wisdom and thus have no incentive to support them. Of course keeping Vinaya is only one part of the training but it is a very important one too.
I remember Ajahn Chah had said “if you do good, the result will be good”. I also believe when the monastics keep the Vinaya as much as they possible could, lay people will “automatically” and happily support them. I have no doubt about that because I had seen this happened many times already.
Ajahn Brahm once said to the monks that “you’re not entitle to respect, support & reverence, you have to earn it”. So how does the monks, the nuns “earn” it? By keeping the Vinaya and practice what they teach, simple to say yet very hard to do.
It’s pretty difficult to discuss about what rule is important, what’s not. But since PaulB said ” Following some recent discussions online with a monastic and layman in Myanmar regarding the widespread use handling of money by monks” and Bhante Sujato had mentioned “Only a tiny proportion of Theravadin monks, maybe 5%, keep the rule on money”. I think it is important to give some thoughts about this particular rule. For me this rule on money is a major and very important one: it’s mentioned in the Vinaya and also in the sutta as well. It’s must be an important point for the Buddha to “compare” using money on par with drinking alcohol, with sexual intercourse AN 4.50
“In the same way, there are four obscurations of contemplatives and brahmans, obscured by which some contemplatives and brahmans don’t glow, don’t shine, don’t dazzle. Which four?
“There are some contemplatives and brahmans who drink alcohol and fermented liquor, who don’t refrain from drinking alcohol and fermented liquor. This is the first obscuration of contemplatives and brahmans, obscured by which some contemplatives and brahmans don’t glow, don’t shine, don’t dazzle.
“There are some contemplatives and brahmans who engage in sexual intercourse, who don’t refrain from sexual intercourse. This is the second obscuration of contemplatives and brahmans, obscured by which some contemplatives and brahmans don’t glow, don’t shine, don’t dazzle.
“There are some contemplatives and brahmans who consent to gold & silver, who don’t refrain from accepting gold & silver. This is the third obscuration of contemplatives and brahmans, obscured by which some contemplatives and brahmans don’t glow, don’t shine, don’t dazzle.
“There are some contemplatives and brahmans who maintain life through wrong livelihood, who don’t refrain from wrong livelihood. This is the fourth obscuration of contemplatives and brahmans, obscured by which some contemplatives and brahmans don’t glow, don’t shine, don’t dazzle”.
This rule on money had been clearly explained in “Monk and Money” by Ajahn Brahm. I do think who ever wants to practice Dhamma in a serious way must consider and have daily reflection upon this important rule. I also note that at Bodhinyana in Perth, novice monk must keep ten precepts and precept# 10 is “I undertake the precept to refrain from accepting gold and silver (money). If the novice has to undertake the precept to refrain from accepting money, it inconceivable and very sad to know that 95% of monks and nuns accept money and that lay people, simply because of tradition or cultural belief, want to offer money to the sangha to have good merits.
There are so many ways to support the sangha, to provide them suitable condition for practice and to practice generosity at the same time. Least of all, one should avoid giving money to individual monk or nun.
8 Likes
I think I would have a similar response although these are also based on our cultural conditioning. Maybe the bhikkhu on the phone was desensitized to the presence of other monks talking in public and did not ‘realise’ the level of attention the rest of the audience was giving. I also think it’s entirely possible that some lay people show greater respect to monks than monastics do to their peers.
Hear hear
In the Path of Purification you’ll find this in chapter I paragraphs 125-7 of Ñāṇamoli’s translation. Another source is the Dakkhiṇāvibhaṅgasutta (MN. 142) and its commentary.
In brief:
• Use of the requisites by a bhikkhu lacking sīla is use as theft.
• Use of them by a bhikkhu who neglects to review the proper purpose in using them is use as a debtor.
• Use by the seven kinds of sekha disciple is use as an inheritance.
• Use by an asekha is use as a master.
7 Likes