Interesting comments on a very relevant topic. Here are my views:
• Handling cash by Theravada monks, in my view, (without knowing too much about the Vinaya), is a serious breach of the Monastic Code, Vinaya. This breach could lead to many other much more serious breaches. However, in any community, there will be rogue elements who would not respect the rules, practices, accepted traditions, heritage & teachings. Theravada Sangha is no exception. Even during the time of the Lord Buddha, there have been instances of dissent. Soon after the Lord Buddha’s Parinibbana, a monk named Subhadda has mounted a challenge of the monastic discipline & spoken for the advocacy of moral laxity. Subhadda’s views have been one of the reasons that the Great Arahant Ven Mahakassapa initiated the 1st Sangha Council to recite & codify the Dhamma. (Great Disciples of the Buddha P130, 131). In another instance, a Bhikku named Arittha advocated that those things called obstructions by the Blessed One are not able to obstruct one who engages in them. (Alagaddupama Sutta – The Simile of the Snake MN 22). The commentary adds that Bhikku Arittha has been advocating on engaging on sensual pleasures, including engaging in sexual relations with women. At least in these two instances, something very positive have occurred, as an after-effect. In the first instance, the 1st Sangha Council & in the second instance, a Great Sutta by the Lord Buddha! So, some bad things lead to great positive outcomes!
• When there are those ‘rogue monks’, we come to realise how lucky we are to be able to associate the good monks & nuns who live in forest monasteries like Bodhinyana & Dhammasara Monasteries & Patacara Hermitage in Australia; Nauyana, Nissarana Vanaya, Tanjan Thanne, Galdoowa, etc. in Sri Lanka; various forest monasteries in Thailand & Burma & the Bhavana Society in USA. It is my gut feeling that there are Arahant Monks living in these places! We could pay our attention to the positives & forget about the rest!!
• It is also up to the Lay Buddhists to send a message to those monks who break the Vinaya by cutting off their support to such monks. Recently, we stopped paying our annual membership fees to a certain Buddhist temple when we came to know that the monks at that place are openly handling cash. We know we are in the minority & a great proportion of lay Buddhists have no problem with such practices. As far as I am concerned, it is OK for such lay Buddhists to support those temples, as some good things come out of those places. Even though we have cut-off our support, we have no problem that the others are supporting them. We stopped our cash contribution because we want to get the full value for our money! So, we started supporting another good, new temple which is a small temple with two good, rule abiding Theravada monks. In the Dakkhinavibhanga Sutta, the Lord Buddha has said that there are 14 kinds of personal offerings. The 1st kind is to the Tathagata, accomplished & fully enlightened. The 2nd kind is to a Paccekabuddha, the 3rd kind is to an arahant disciple of the Tathagata…………. The 13th kind of gift is to an immoral ordinary person. The 14th kind is making an offering to an animal. (Dakkhinavibhanga Sutta – The exposition of Offerings MN 142). Where could we slot a cash-handling, Theravada monk? Probably, at a slightly better position than an immoral ordinary person, assuming that some portion of the seed of the Dhamma would get planted in the minds of these cash-handling monks. If they have other good Kamma, the Seed of the Dhamma will no doubt mature in a later life. So, all is not bad!
• Having only 5% to 10% of the Theravada Monks & nuns in the world who follow the Vinaya may not be a bad situation, either. To be positive, I will take-up the 10% figure! If there are, say, 200,000 Theravada monks in the world, (this number is just an educated guess), there could be about 20,000 good, rule-abiding monks & nuns which I would say, (in this sensually dominated, materialistic world), is quite an achievement!. If 10% of them are stream enterers or above, there are about 2,000 Arya Sangha, Noble Disciples of the Gautama Buddha who are practising the Dhamma in the good way!! Wow, what a good place this world is!!! So, rejoice Dhamma Friends, don’t despair!!!
With Metta,
Upasako
This reminds me of some monks who actually do not handle cash but they get all what they want for the temple by asking the devotees to do so. They for example tell a devotee such things as “If we have a table to put these things on that will be very good. In fact, such tables are available in such and such shops at these prices.” So the devotee, out of embarrassment, supplies the table.
I am not sure if this type of practice is acceptable because at the end of the day, if the devotees on their own do not provide these necessities, the monks have to somehow get it.
Also I personally know a lot of monks who openly accept money and at least one of them even drive his own car. This temple has a lot of devotees who make monthly contributions to the temple and in addition they offer cash to the monks whenever there is a ritual like dedication of merit to a dead relative being performed. These people are clueless as to what Dhamma is all about and tend to think that by not offering cash to the monks they are acquiring demerit or they find someway to justify their actions.
I am really sad about what is going on but at the same time I know that these temples offer a place for people to get together at times when they have a personal need or Katina offering or something. Buddhism continues to exist, I think, partly due to these mundane acts on the part of the majority of so called Buddhists.
With Metta
Great answer. Thank you.
Just to clarify a bit, there are really two sets of standards, and only one of them is called “The four Great Standards”. These Great Standards are the ones that were used to collect the suttas and the Vinaya after the Buddha’s passing away. Then there is the four standards found in the chapter on medicines in the Khandhakas, which are the standards your are referring to here. As you and Gabriel rightly point out, these standards are used to decide what foods and medicines are allowable for monastics. And, as you say, these standards can probably be used more generally to decide what is allowable.
why should they? monastics are only entitled to 4 requisites and a few minor things
I am actually not condoning their getting it but that is the way it is.
With Metta
got it 
I know this is a thread from earlier this year but I’ve enjoyed reading it and rather than starting a new thread thought I would add to the conversation. I’m coming up to 9 months as an anagarika in a ‘city’ residence and am being often ask when I will take brown robes so this is on my mind.
One of the things I’ve been considering is the difference between 8 and 10 precepts and again to the full ordination. Why would One take the extra precepts without the desire and/or ability to keep them?
It is possible to keep ‘good sīla’ in the city, yet many, very kind, monastics do not. Even when they have access to anagarika/lay-stewards. The reason I’ve been given is that the seniors do such-n-such so if the juniors where to insist on this rule then it’d make the seniors look bad. This is indeed a tough predicament for junior monastics.
For me the ‘money handling rule’ is about ‘freedom from desires’. We don’t need much to practice the Holy Life. If a monastic can just go to the shops and get what they desire this is just being pulled around by craving. Not real freedom.
As an aside; I’m already considering things like birthday and Christmas gifts once I’m on 10 precepts. The rule means I need to be creative and genuine in the way I relate to the people I care about. Rather than just buykng something to show my appreciation. For me it is a difficult thing because my family aren’t Buddhist but I can see in the long-term it gives me an opportunity to form deeper connections.
One final thought.
Maybe the samenera/sameneri rules are then more suited to a ‘city’ monastic? Though they don’t allow for expulsion from the sangha for offences against them (ie sexual acts or acts of theft)
Thank you for this interesting set of reflections. I really look forward to reading at some future point how you resolved the questions you raised (for that time at least).
I’m not at all convinced I’ve anything worth adding to the mix. Furthermore, apologies, because even though I took part in it, I can’t remember what was said in the discussion above so please excuse any duplication. All the same…
From my POV I’m entirely baffled by the idea of voluntarily committing to live by a code without any wish to live by the given code. As for the ‘ability’ part, however, in a certain way (just with respect to how I read things) I almost find it a secondary issue (so long as the committent to try is there).
Aside from some serious offences, I get the impression that the code is to be applied with a real amount of softness, or tolerance (almost as though it were a guide for trainees!! 
Y’know, folk who are by definition not perfect).
The point is very sweetly put in SN1.35; AN3.4 not only points towards a ‘baked-in’ attitude of allowance (or forgiveness), but also sub-textually implies people are transgressing all over the shop, and perhaps above all the key point is that “it is growth in the Noble One’s Discipline when one sees one’s transgression as a transgression, makes amends for it in accordance with the Dhamma” (various ).
Feeding this back into the specific question of money handling, of course the rule is there for very good reasons. I enjoy seeing it observed and am not so keen on seeing it disregarded. But we do live in a terribly complicated world. I remember reading Bhante Gunaratana’s account of establishing a monastery in the US and with respect to his explanation of the circumstances in which he used money, I eventually just said, “oh alright then.”
This is such an excellently charming concern!
A bhikkhuni once gave me some peanuts and fruit. Setting aside the point of being thoroughly entertained by the fact that she’d evidently confused the direction of travel of food in the relationship between monastics and laypeople, I was deeply touched by her gift. (Unrelatedly and unbeknown to her) A week or so before it had been my birthday, and although I was and remain hugely grateful for everything I received, after really straining I’ve so far only managed to remember one item I got. The humble little pieces of fruit and the nuts (and the love that accompanied them), however, stand as a very clear memory.
Many years ago I had a dream, where I realized it was Xmas eve, and i hadn’t bought any presents! I was so worried, trying to see how I could buy all the presents before closing time. Then I woke up, and was like, “Phew, I’m a monk! I never have to buy anything ever again!”
Wait a second, so if a senior monk or nun breaks a precept, or skips a precept, the expectation is for the juniors to do the same thing? Remember when you took Refuge in the Triple-Gem, you did it for the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha of the Noble Disciples. Basically you pledged your allegiance to the Buddha and His Teaching, not to your senior teacher. Matter of fact, a senior teacher, regardless of whether s/he’s a world-renowned one who’s able to recite every single verse in the Tipitaka, is still not above the system. S/he still has to follow the creed in the Dhamma and Vinaya. So really, there’s not much difference between you and your senior teachers. S/he might be a bit ahead of you on the Path, but you both are still un-enlightened Kalyanamittas who need to help each other to make progress. If you feel you need to do the right thing, then do the right thing. Even point it out to the senior rank when the occasion is right. Who know, they might even thank you for pointing out gaps and void in their practice. Let’s be bloody honest here, we’re all un-enlightened and the senior folks should be aware of this fact much better than their junior students.
That is wonderful! I believe Anagarika is a great experience; all the progress that one can achieve along the path as a freely roaming anagarika! So, if i may volunteer to say this: Good luck in your experience either as anagarika or whenever you feel ready for ordination. Before my ordination others used to ask me also: “Are you planning to ordain? When will you ordain?” - “I don’t know!” I said!
The same situation applies to all monastic rules and regulations, all of which are kinds of precepts also. What’s unique about the Theravada tradition, in my understanding, is the devotion to the way things were in the earliest times, this is what the word “Thera” very much indicates in this context. But contrary to that devotion, there are the challenges of living in a complex monetary economy that did not exist in the time of the Buddha, and to which friend @Aminah refers above, and there is also the compromising or even sometimes absence of that devotion in the majority of present-day ordained Theravada monastics, in the case of minor rules! Today those who follow the precepts to the letter and continue to uphold minor rules, do so either because they experience devotion to the Vinaya as a whole or to the original Theravada spirit, independently and against all odds i’d say, or because they are requested or trained to follow them in a minority strict traditions (such as Forest Traditions), or because they have developed some understanding and appreciation of the psychological benefits of following them.
Now to attempt to answer your question: for those who do not follow the precepts strictly; why vow or claim to respect the precepts, though one does not intend to follow them? A relevant question here is also, why perform the confession procedure (for fully ordained monastics) over an offence that one intends to repeat?! This happens because there are different layers or a hierarchy of precepts here; and not all of them compromisable or negotiable. And this hierarchy is not altogether haphazard or illogical, or produced by tradition, or even hypocritical as some may think; but rather it is based on monastics’ understanding of the qualitative difference between minor and serious rules, which even the Buddha points out, in his most significant declaration just before He passes into parinibbana, which gave licence to monastics to change minor rules in the future if they so wished. And while originally, the whole point about the Theravada tradition lies in its insistence on not changing any such minor rules, by way of showing utter devotion to the word and wisdom of Buddha, yet nevertheless, as I mentioned earlier, this devotion is no longer practically upheld by the great majority of Theravada monastics in the case of minor rules, but it persists quite vibrantly in the case of serious rules or established Theravada traditions. This is how we finally arrive at the situation where monastics will break a minor rule intentionally and publicly, but will not neglect or ignore the practice of confessing it, because performing the confession is not a minor rule that can be compromised. If you examine the text, not just the Vinayapitaka but also Suttapitaka, you will find that the emphasis on not using money is as clear as daylight; and the rules are detailed and intricate even regarding how monastics should manage donations from a distance, what language to use with the donor and the lay steward who will be in possession of the funds, and so forth. But all these rules have practically been abandoned in the Theravada tradition that thrives today, even consciously and willingly and without any sense of shame or guilt or self-contempt; this is so because rules about handling money are minor ones. But attempting to change serious rules or established Theravada traditions (such as confessing violating minor rules!) - that would bring the most vehement and passionate opposition by the great majority of Theravada monastics, including those who themselves no longer follow minor rules. In this context may also be better understood the widespread opposition to resuming bhikkhuni ordination.
But you are still very right, and this is an important issue. There are significant problems in the practice of taking a precept by way of show! Taking it but not taking it! Or confessing a normal behaviour! It’s like making a promise although one knows that one will not keep, or apologising to someone for an act that one does not consider wrong! Or apologising today for a wrong act that one intends to repeat tomorrow! There are paradoxes here, and they do pose psychological challenges for those who insist on living with a consistent and integrated heart. And the Buddha wants us to live with precisely such heart! But although there will always be certain realities and practices that we will have to accept and accommodate once we chose to ordain in any tradition; yet the nice thing is that the mature understanding of all these dynamics, which are mundane(!), allows us to find the wisdom to transcend their challenges in our own private and individual experience. So good luck! :).
A junior monastic, in an environment such as this, and with relationships of this nature with their teachers and seniors, have in my opinion far more serious troubles than those of just keeping the vinaya I suppose! Let us not forget that the mere seniority of a monastic does not indicate anything about their integrity or wisdom, or even faith. And speaking of keeping the vinaya; according to the text, a junior monastic is advised to leave an environment like this and find a wholesome one, and even to make an effort to dissuade those teachers and seniors he or she comes across who espouse gross wrong views regarding Dhammavinaya. I don’t suppose these rules are even remembered today, let alone practised; nevertheless, a junior or senior monastic who for whatever reason submits to an unwholesome monastic reality has only himself or herself to blame; there is nothing in the Vinaya which compels them to stay; and it is a great mistake to stay! And so long a monastic is not boasting of his or her strict vinaya and demeaning others for the laxity of theirs; then a good teacher or senior monastic, even if their vinaya was lax, still, could only relate to this practitioner with appreciation, and would never make the slightest effort to cause that practitioner to turn away from their vinaya practice and devotion. Any other scenario means that one is indeed residing in a problematic monastic environment and should, IMHO, leave as soon as they can.
As Venerable @sujato subtly points out above: one form of the bliss of the renunciate life is that a mendicant does no longer need to worry about “giving” anything that is of material nature. Though it is obvious to me that a mendicant’s desire to give such material gifts could be compulsive, that is, arising from attachment! Thus, it could take time even for one who chooses to go forth and lead a renunciate mendicant life, to learn how to let go of enjoying mundane forms of giving, and instead enjoy the higher renunciate bliss, not of “non-giving”, but of living on the periphery of society, without mundane cares, responsibilities, and heaviness! The dream of Venerable Sujato, as I understood it, is a good simile of that kind of transformation in the view of what one considers to be joy and bliss, from mundane to renunciate.
I’m sorry but I have failed in understanding this question! :).
Glad to meet you! :).
@anon61506839 thank you Bhante for your lengthy and considered reply. I really appreciate it and it aligns with my own thoughts and the advice others who know me well have been offering.
Great to meet you too!
That is an attractive statement - can we do this as lay people, I wonder?
Might be possible if you’re still single. But if you’re married and with kids, then it’ll be very difficult because of the obvious shift in priorities. You now have to work your behind off to make sure your family have a roof over their heads and enough food on the table to feed the hungry mouths. For monastics, it’s all free room and board. But it doesn’t come cheap. One is expected to observe the creed from the Dhamma and Vinaya. Otherwise, they’d be considered Dhamma thieves.
Not single but not married and no kids. Working on a simple life and covering the basic needs mainly. Let’s see where it takes me.
We have a couple of amazing lay supporters who appear to be very well practiced and peaceful. Further along in their practice than myself I would say.
They are both equally dedicated to the Dhamma. Even though they have ‘good qualifications’ they have now taken simple part time jobs as a after hours cleaner and a carer. They do not get involved in big gatherings, watch tv or other entertainment.
They offer daana as much as they can and invite monks to stay with them and teach themselves and their friends. Most importantly they 100% support each other’s practice. It seems as if they’ve been doing this for more than one lifetime. Yet they still see great value in taking robes themselves. The freedom from participating in a commerce entirely is something no lay-person can have.
I mention this couple as what I see as the ‘best’ lay lives I’ve seen. I think this kind of situation is very rare, but if you are fortunate enough you could cultivate something like this.
Absolutely. Even without celibacy, it is possible to make great progress if your partner accepts and appreciates the spiritual determination to which you apply your heart (note that your spiritual striving will have effects on your relationships). Of course in this case there will be limitations also as to how fast and how far you can possibly reach! But still, you can go further than many celibate mendicants who make little or no progress at all! Of course if your support system (making a living) is too intense and stressful then this will be quite difficult. But the challenging factor is seldom the world, the deciding factor is within, your own heart, chanda! Do you really want this? And how far do you want to go? And with what understanding and faith have you come by this path?! What ‘purpose’ is mobilising you here? And how much dedication you are willing to give to your own purpose?
And it applies to everything; forget about spirituality: if you fancy to, for example, play the piano, to become really good at it; this will require so much attention, training, time, devotion and dedication, effort, discipline, and so on. All four iddhipada are relevant here! You will spend less time with your friends and family, those in reality or those on facebook, and you won’t be coming here at Discourse as often as before! You simply won’t have time for all that, now that you have to train for several hours a day. And lets not forget the back pain that will agonise you even more than an astute meditator, sitting on your bottom all day long striking those keys! And then, just as the case in the spiritual path, the most serious challenge will not be others or the world, you might even be encouraged and supported by everyone around you. No, the serious challenge will be how much long can you sustain this pressure, and whether you still really want to play this terribly difficult instrument that requires your withdrawal from the world in such a way!
And the next thing you know, you’re playing a pellet drum!
I have learned that believing in nibbana and striving towards it, are two completely different things! And YES, in as much as there’s joy and bliss and release, there’s also will-power and strenuous striving on this path. BUT YOU CAN DO IT!
Yes, Pasanna. That sounds like a very agreeable situation for lay life although admittedly super rare to find. It is beautiful to hear about and thank you for sharing it with us so that we are aware that people are doing this. Chance would be a fine thing that my partner were Buddhist and as understanding as the lifestyle demands but alas, he is supportive to a certain extent, and beyond what is typical I would say in this society (Lancashire, UK), so I work with that. I see it as give and take as per my circumstances but I have aligned my work situation better also having taken a job in adult social care and with a flexible amount of hours which allows for study & practice/less job-focused thinking as well as volunteering at my local nature reserve & supporting Anukampa Bhikkhuni Project where I can.
What you guys are doing out in Australia is a source of great inspiration and guidance so keep up the good work - it is so necessary!
Thank you for the encouragement, Dhammarakkhita. I get what you are saying regarding the piano analogy. I must admit one feels like one is at the foot of the mountain at times but I find that is precisely the time to bring back the focus to the present moment and attend to what’s there. My livelihood is currently manageable and person-centred so it can be supportive for the development of certain qualities I’m in need of developing. I cannot say with any certainty that within my own heart I have 100% commitment to relinquishing everything just yet - my path is working through these things and ‘becoming’ lighter as I go. At least in theory but perhaps I backtrack sometimes as things change. I have a lot of saddha for the Buddha-Dhamma so this carries me through any rough patches and I’ve been at it now for about 17 years or so to varying degrees of commitment.
The relationship situation, I feel, is an area that both supports and hinders. I see that quite clearly but again, it’s something I manage. Every experience can be food for the heart so I try to see it this way. It’s a great stress-buster, actually. 