Stand Against Suffering: An Unprecedented Call to Action by Buddhist Teachers

Yes, I’ve been googling around trying to understand he provenance of that statement, and as far as I can tell, it is simply one of those fake Buddha quotes that tend to float around.

2 Likes

its quoted from the Mahaparinibbana sutta - SuttaCentral

although like I said there are mahayana versions, so maybe there is a line closer to that translation in there, but certainly not in the Pali, so they technically could be right, I just had a red flag go up in my head after reading it as it sounded like a translation that took a lot of liberties.

2: Seven Things which Prevent Decline in the Vajjians
Now at that time venerable Ānanda was stood behind the Gracious One fanning the Gracious One. Then the Gracious One addressed venerable Ānanda, saying:

  1. “Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians assemble regularly and assemble frequently?’” “I have heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians assemble regularly and assemble frequently.’” “For as long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians will assemble regularly and assemble frequently surely growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
  1. Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians assemble unanimously, rise unanimously, and carry out their Vajjian duties unanimously?’” “I have heard this, reverend Sir, that the Vajjians assemble unanimously, rise unanimously, and carry out their Vajjian duties unanimously.” “For as long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians will assemble unanimously, rise unanimously, and carry out their Vajjian duties unanimously, surely growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
  1. Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians do not establish new laws that were not established, or cut off old laws that were established, and carry on with such laws as were accepted in the Ancient Vajjian Constitution?’” “I have heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians do not establish new laws that were not established, or cut off old laws that were established, and they carry on with such laws as were accepted in the Ancient Vajjian Constitution.’” “For as long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians do not establish new laws that were not established, or cut off old laws that were established, and they carry on with such laws as were accepted in the Ancient Vajjian Constitution surely growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
  1. Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians honour the elders of the Vajjians, respect, revere, worship and think them worth listening to?’” “I have heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians honour the elders of the Vajjians, respect, revere, worship and think them worth listening to.’” “For as long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians will honour the elders of the Vajjians, respect, revere, worship and think them worth listening to, surely growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
  1. Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians do not coerce and force their women and girls to dwell with them against their will?’” “I have heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians do not coerce and force their women and girls to dwell with them against their will.’” “For as long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians will not coerce and force their women and girls to dwell with them against their will, surely growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
  1. Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians honour the Vajjian shrines amongst the Vajjians, both within and without the city, respect, revere, and worship them, and do not allow the righteous sacrifices that were formerly given, formerly made, to be neglected?’” “I have heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians honour the Vajjian shrines amongst the Vajjians, both within and without the city, respect, revere, and worship them, and do not allow the righteous sacrifices that were formerly given, formerly made, to be neglected.” “For as long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians will honour the Vajjian shrines amongst the Vajjians, both within and without the city, respect, revere, and worship them, and do not allow the righteous sacrifices that were formerly given, formerly made, to be neglected surely growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.
  1. Have you heard, Ānanda: ‘The Vajjians have made good arrangements in regard to the lawful protection, safety, and guarding of the Worthy Ones, so that Worthy Ones in the future can enter the realm, and having entered the Worthy Ones can live comfortably in the realm?” “I have heard this, reverend Sir: ‘The Vajjians have made good arrangements in regard to the lawful protection, safety, and guarding of the Worthy Ones, and that the Worthy Ones in the future can enter the realm, and having entered the Worthy Ones can live comfortably in the realm.” “For as long, Ānanda, as the Vajjians will make good arrangements in regard to the lawful protection, safety, and guarding of the Worthy Ones, and that the Worthy Ones in the future can enter the realm, and having entered, the Worthy Ones can live comfortably in the realm, surely growth, Ānanda, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.”

Then the Gracious One addressed the Magadhan chief minister the brahmin Vassakāra, saying: “At one time, brahmin, I was living near Vesālī near to the Sārandada Shrine and there I taught the Vajjians these seven things which prevent decline. For as long, brahmin, as the Vajjians maintain these seven things which prevent decline, and the Vajjians agree with these seven things which prevent decline, surely growth, brahmin, is to be expected for the Vajjians not decline.”

After this was said, the Magadhan chief minister the brahmin Vassakāra addressed the Gracious One, saying: “If the Vajjians, dear Gotama, were endowed with even one or the other of these seven things which prevent decline, surely growth is to be expected not decline, what to say about having seven things which prevent decline? The Vajjians cannot be overcome, dear Gotama, by the Magadhan King Ajātasattu, the son of Lady Wisdom, by war, but only through diplomacy, or through the breaking of an alliance. And now, dear Gotama, we shall go, as we have many duties, and there is much which ought to be done.”

“Now is the time, brahmin, for whatever you are thinking.” Then the Magadhan chief minister the brahmin Vassakāra, after greatly rejoicing and gladly receiving this word of the Gracious One, rose from his seat and departed.

5 Likes

Just google “monk politics” - all that appears on the first pages of google results are exclusively buddhist leftist monks.

Christian priest (not monks) might some times get involved in politics. They might slightly suggest people what to vote at the church, but rarely will you see christian priest writing long political articles, especially high profile and respected priests. They’re smart enough to know that would make them lose credibility and be used against them by the left. Religion should stay out of politics and respect the church-state separation.

As for christian monks, it’s basically unheard of for christian monks to get involved into politics. Especially deep to the throat like buddhist ones. Addiction to politics appears to be one of the biggest problems in terms of Vinaya of buddhist monks. Maybe we as laypeople should start putting pressure on monks to fix this bad habit. It is embarrassing buddhism in the west. Maybe my joke about de-politization rehabs for monks would actually not be too bad of an idea.

It is quite easy to do and does not require many resources.

  1. Remove the monk from the toxic political environment of his monastery.
  2. Place the monk in quarantine in another monastery with monks that respect the Vinaya or at least do not have problems with politics. There are many monasteries with predominantly asian monks where the western monk can be placed.
  3. Block that huffingtonpost website from the computer.
  4. The monk should be advised to memorize the Vinaya rules regarding suitable topics of conversation and engagement into politics + Counseling from elder monks about renunciacion and attachment + explain the monk why those rules were put in the Vinaya.
  5. An elder should supervise the monk after the rehab program to prevent relapse into the old habit. Other monks should be supportive and try to distract the monk with other topics of conversation until full political detoxification and re-integration into the monastery is achieved.

Dude. Seriously. Relax.

2 Likes

Ok ok. Enough jokes. :anjal:

It should not be understood that I am judging B.Bodhi to be a bad monk because of his habbit. On the contrary, I consider him one of the few truly knowledgeable monks, well versed in the suttas. And he has a good and modest character. It is precisely because of this that I have always been critical of his political addiction. You can number on the fingers of a single hand the monks of the caliber of B.Bodhi that exist. And this habit left untreated is ruining his credibility to many people. As I’ve said, there were a couple of times where I tried to bring B.Bodhi into an argument and the person dismissed him from the start cause of his political habit. People are always fast to devalue another person based on a small character flaw that they have, especially if it’s an annoying one like politics that instantly antagonizes a big part of buddhist towards him.

There is a section in the vinaya dealing with the benefits of following the rules. One of the benefits was preserving respect to the shanga, not making it open to criticism from the outside world.

Becoming a monk is much more difficult that people realize. A person who becomes a monk has renounced woman, money, sea side vacations, family etc. He has renounced the strongest attachments that one can renounce. Let him not ruin his credibility with this last attachment to politics that is to be renounced. What he renounced before was much more difficult to renounce than this last little attachment.

I have no faith in politicians even though that I believe there are good politicians. Another assumption they made here is that a country is run by politicians. I think the countries are run by some invisible force. I see politicians as straw men/women.
My main concern here is Ven. Bodhi. I think his effort should be aimed at elsewhere. Buddhist monks should keep away from direct politics. There are more qualified people to take the place of politicians.

1 Like

Yes, if you look around the internet, you will find that someone, somewhere decided to translate that passage about women and girls, like this:

“As long as a society protects the wives and daughters and vulnerable among them, they can they be expected to prosper and not decline.”

I have no idea where this version comes from, but it now seems to have been passed around promiscuously and taken on the status of a bona fide Fake Buddha Quote :slight_smile:

Now the signatories of this message have gone even further, and transformed the text even more by lopping off the part about the women and girls, keeping mostly the fake part.

I don’t think it is from the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra. I looked a a few translations of that sutra, and couldn’t find it there either.

2 Likes

Can you point to something in the Vinaya where it is forbidden for Bhikkhus to teach lay people about wholesome and unwholesome actions?

Of course, you have a right to question and/or reject the opinion or interpretation of certain Bhikkhus, just as others have the same right regarding your opinions.

2 Likes

Before you admitted to be not-entirely-serious, I was about to remark that your methods of sangha governance and purification seems to resemble a dictator, or at worst treating monks as if they were children.

If “mainstream” Theraváda monks took such approaches towards enforcing orthodoxy we wouldn’t even have a SuttaCentral, or, “Early Textual Buddhism” would be entirely a sect of its own, split off on doctrinal and philosophical grounds much like a classical Christian schism, not like any Buddhist schism of precedent.

Monks would be required to disavow “early” Buddhism as a modern heresy. If reading the suttáni resulted in propegation of “Early Buddhism” ideologies, those very suttáni would be banned to those without proper (read: Abhidhammic) context to interpret them.

I can imagine similar “isolation cells” for Abhidhamma-questioning monks as those you suggest for “political” monks.

That is what would be the case, IMO, if mainstream Theravada took the approaches toward preserving orthodoxy that you (non-seriously) suggest.

2 Likes

I can imagine similar “isolation cells” for Abhidhamma-questioning monks as those you suggest for “political” monks.

That is what would be the case, IMO, if mainstream Theravada took the approaches toward preserving orthodoxy that you (non-seriously) suggest.

But the Vinaya does not ban speech about the dhamma. It does not advise monks who follow the suttas not to speak about it. There is no such rule that I know of. The vinaya only advises against political discussion among monks, discussion about kings etc. Such as discussion about Trump, discussion about governance of the country or the end of the world coming because the republicans won the elections.

As for the de-politization program, I even came up with a name: “One monk at a time” :grin:

I’m a bit of a novice when it comes to being critically informed about vinaya.

I know a couple of scholarly truisms that are bandied about, about how the vinaya, from a Western Christianity-informed perspective, seems “light” on Buddhist philosophy, doctrine, and Buddhavacana-interpretation.

There must, however, surely, be some checks-and-balance system to prevent monks from saying anything about the Dhamma.

Otherwise, what is stopping a prominent Theravada monk from converting to Lotus Buddhism and proclaiming the Buddha to be all-present, all-pervading, unending and unbeginning? Or declaring that this is mappó, as some sects do, and declaring the “original” teachings of Shakyamuni to be no longer effective? Or teaching that the Buddha was a humanoid alien on account of his marks of a great man (some people believe this!)?

There surely has to be some system of check-and-balances when dealing with monks’ own Dhamma-dispensations?

However, the Buddha spoke to lay people and kings about good and bad ways of organising households and societies. It would be strange if modern Bhikkhus did not do the same.

1 Like

Yes, not about politics or kings/presidents. For example if he spoke about helping poor persons, he spoke so in general, as a goal to be achieved, as a trait to be developed. He did not start advocating for left-wing or right-wing measures to be implemented in order to help the poor. (actually, he never spoke about helping the poor, at least not in the suttas) He did not bash a political candidate or political party. He did not start predicting the end of the world if one or another king got in power in a particular country, etc.

There is a difference between giving general advice about being a good person and bashing political parties or political candidates or doing propaganda for a political party.

Now that I have done by best to answer your question, I want to ask another in return: What is your take on those right speech rules ? What is your opinion about unsuitable subjects of conversation witch include politics, rulers and ministers, governance of the country ?

1 Like

[quote=“Maiev, post:20, topic:4826, full:true”]As for the de-politization program, I even came up with a name: “One monk at a time” :grin:
[/quote]I thought it had a more “the Vinayal Solution” ring to it, but perhaps that’s a joke too dark for a Buddhist forum :scream:

:raised_hands: Chris Arnade has been one of my heroes for years. Thank you so much for sharing this!

I really don’t think that’s what’s happening in this article, Bhante (and you can feel free to disagree with me). The diction of this article is very careful to not create an ‘us’ vs. ‘them’ paradigm, at least not within a political sense. It seems rather to be articulating that there are political values that are compassionate and those that are not – and it doesn’t really matter which party articulates those values.

I also feel very supportive of Bhikkhu Bodhi in his endeavors because he has wonderfully refrained from engaging in political debate while simultaneously advocating for those who are suffering. It seems clear that it is tremendously difficult to separate the political from advocacy work, particularly when legislation directly impacts and aggravates the suffering of the people one is fighting for.

I do not think Bhikkhu Bodhi has breached any aspect of the Vinaya. He is not engaging in political talk (or even referencing political talk) for the sake of taking sides, which it seems is what the Buddha so dissuaded against. But rather his advocacy aims to help people, to alleviate their suffering, of which he has done a remarkable job in doing.

10 Likes

He was quite explicit about the wholesome and unwholesome in lay people all the way up to kings…

“Householder, there are these five utilizations of wealth. What five?

(1) “Here, householder, with wealth acquired by energetic striving, amassed by the strength of his arms, earned by the sweat of his brow, righteous wealth righteously gained, the noble disciple makes himself happy and pleased and properly maintains himself in happiness; he makes his parents happy and pleased and properly maintains them in happiness; he makes his wife and children, his slaves, workers, and servants happy and pleased and properly maintains them in happiness. This is the first utilization of wealth.

https://suttacentral.net/en/an5.41[/quote]

“Bhikkhus, even a wheel-turning monarch, a righteous king who rules by the Dhamma, does not turn the wheel without a king above him.”

When this was said, a certain bhikkhu said to the Blessed One: “But, Bhante, who is the king above a wheel-turning monarch, a righteous king who rules by the Dhamma?”

“It is the Dhamma, bhikkhu,” the Blessed One said. “Here, bhikkhu, a wheel-turning monarch, a righteous king who rules by the Dhamma, relying just on the Dhamma, honoring, respecting, and venerating the Dhamma, taking the Dhamma as his standard, banner, and authority, provides righteous protection, shelter, and guard for the people in his court. Again, a wheel-turning monarch, a righteous king who rules by the Dhamma, relying just on the Dhamma, honoring, respecting, and venerating the Dhamma, taking the Dhamma as his standard, banner, and authority, provides righteous protection, shelter, and guard for his khattiya vassals, his army, brahmins and householders, the people of town and countryside, ascetics and brahmins, and the animals and birds. Having provided such righteous protection, shelter, and guard for all these beings, that wheel-turning monarch, a righteous king who rules by the Dhamma, turns the wheel solely through the Dhamma, a wheel that cannot be turned back by any hostile human being.
https://suttacentral.net/en/an3.14/1-3

‘Thereupon the Brahman who was chaplain said to the king: “The king’s country, Sire, is harassed and harried. There are dacoits abroad who pillage the villages and townships, and who make the roads unsafe. Were the king, so long as that is so, to levy a fresh tax, verily his majesty would be acting wrongly. But perchance his majesty might think: ‘I’ll soon put a stop to these scoundrels’ game by degradation and banishment, and fines and bonds and death!’ But their licence cannot be satisfactorily put a stop to so. The remnant left unpunished would still go on harassing the realm. Now there is one method to adopt to put a thorough end to this disorder. Whosoever there be in the king’s realm who devote themselves to keeping cattle and the farm, to them let his majesty the king give food and seed-corn. Whosoever there be in the king’s realm who devote themselves to trade, to them let his majesty the king give capital. Whosoever there be in the king’s realm who devote themselves to government service, to them let his majesty the king give wages and food. Then those men, following each his own business, will no longer harass the realm; the king’s revenue will go up; the country will be quiet and at peace; and the populace, pleased one with another and happy, dancing their children in their arms, will dwell with open doors.”
https://suttacentral.net/en/dn5/14

I do realise that people have different opinions. Perhaps you would like to point out how in tune with the Dhamma certain modern politicians are, and how their policies relate to such sutta passages.

1 Like

With the accent on the “wonderfully refrained”

It was with feelings of shock and dismay that early this morning I woke up to learn that Donald Trump had been elected president of the United States.
Buddhist Channel | Opinion


I do realise that people have different opinions. Perhaps you would like to point out how in tune with the Dhamma certain modern politicians are, and how their policies relate to such sutta passages.

If we google “monks politics” most results are about american leftist monks. But if we google “political monks” all news that appear are about political monks from asian countries. Only if we go to page 20 do we find anything about non-buddhist monks. Many monks are members of the parliament in asian countries. There are cases of monks getting killed in violet battles with the police at demonstrations. If we click on those articles, we see that they justify their engagement with politics to the point of violent battles in the same way as western monks. They say Buddhism is about well being and politics is also about well being, that they are not taking sides just fighting for what is good, etc.

For example let’s take a look at how these monks justify themselves in this article:

http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/monks-walk-tightrope-between-peace-and-politics

I don’t think this is what Buddha had in mind about being a monk. I think he had an idea of monks behaving more like Christian monks. When was the last time you saw something like that happening with christian monks ? Such things don’t happen even with christian priest, let alone christian monks. When was the last time you saw christian monks writing political articles ?

Do you have any actual concrete thoughts you’d like to express about how the Dhamma should inform politics, or are you just going to keep reiterating your particular political agenda?

Do you have any actual concrete thoughts you’d like to express about how the Dhamma should inform politics, or are you just going to keep reiterating your particular political agenda?

I think the dhamma, be it the dhamma of Buddha, Jesus or Mohamed, should stay away from politics and deal only with people at the individual level. Religious figures should just encourage people to cultivate good traits at the individual level and let these lay people figure out what to vote for themselves.

The reason leftist religious figures have a harder time understanding this “individual level” part is because the left is generally focused on the state, asking the state to do this and that to benefit the people. It rarely focuses on the individual level of improving the person. And in the case of monks, this translates into making the state implement this and that buddhist idea, encouraging the state to cultivate this or that good trait in people instead of dealing with them at the individual level. They take this emphasis on the state instead of the individual with them after becoming monastics.

The fact that this phenomenon is so rare in christian priest and unheard of in christian monastics shows that attachment to politics can be overcome. And maybe this emphasis on the individual is the factor responsible for conservatives donating on average 30% more to charity than liberals.

The Buddhist path, like it or not, is about the individual. Dwell with yourself as an island, with yourself as a refugee. The state can not enlighten you, it can not force you to be compassionate.