It is true that living a good and meaningful life is more important than health and longevity. Indeed I have read convincing arguments according to which the longevity diets that are becoming more and more fashionable are a way to mask the loss of meaning in many people’s lives: in other words people who are less happy and lead less meaningful life tend to have more difficulty accepting that they age and eventually die, so they become overly concerned with nutrition and health fads.
But conversely some interest in medicine and nutrition is in my opinion beneficial. For example they can help you improve digestion, which is a good thing, even according to the suttas. So I believe that ignorance (or contempt) for what science has discovered in the field of nutrition is not a healthy attitude. Indeed I have heard some talks even by monks, like Ajahn Appichato, who speak of the importance of nutrition.
Maybe we should go by the EBTs!
With metta!
The robe & bowl are the symbols of the Sangha.
I’ve been told that if you don’t have a Buddha image available you can bow to the almsbowl.
I was fascinated to discover different practices among lineages to show respect for the almsbowl.
- Forest tradition practitioners use the bowl daily, some declining any food not placed into their bowl, showing respect through daily use and close observance of the details of traditional proper bowl care (such as kneeling while wiping the bowl dry lest it get damaged if dropped, and further drying it in the sun if possible after each use).
- Monks at some other communities, such as a Laotian temple near Charlotte and some Sri Lankan temples in cities in the USA, keep all the bowls stored away together in a safe place, respecting almsbowls by only bringing them out for special occasions. (And in some communities they accept any bowl handed to them on that occasion, being unattached to any particular bowl; whereas Forest Tradition monks care diligently for their one beloved bowl without seeking another until it’s unusable. When different communities get together for special occasions in the West, I’ve learned that those of us loyal to one bowl must take care after a communal wash-up to make sure that this bowl doesn’t end up among a large collection of community bowls in the back of a van returning to a distant monastery.)
- At a certain Vietnamese temple I visited in Charlotte, a nun pointed out their glass (!) almsbowls locked in a China cabinet, and explained that the bowl is treated as carefully as though it were the Buddha’s head, for if broken, that would indicate the end of one’s holy life! Therefore they don’t dare to use the bowl and always keep it safely stored.
(Similarly, I’ve noticed that Sri Lankan monks bring along and use their Sanghati double-layer outer robe only on formal occasions, wearing it folded neatly over the left shoulder, and keep it set aside most of the time as a venerated object of ritual; whereas Forest Tradition monks use the Sanghati robe casually every day. Both would surely say they are showing highest respect to the Sanghati robe by their manner of use.)
[Edited typo causally -> casually]
How do these practices differ from rites and rituals in your opinion?
I understand Buddhist practice as developing kindness gentleness and letting go, all internal qualities of the heart, which should lead to samadhi and wisdom. All this happens in the mind (or heart) of the practitioner. I do not understand how these practices relating to an external object help one’s practice, or indeed to what extent they are inherently different from rites and rituals.
There’s no harm inherent to the observation of rites and rituals. The harm is in the view that any rites or rituals whatsoever may bring some kind of lasting salvation or Nibbana. This deeply held assumption belongs to all ordinary people, not broken until attaining the 1st stage of enlightenment.
I respectfully disagree with this. I know plenty of people (for example scientists I work with, and who are atheists) who never practice so they are not stream winners and who consider all rites and rituals absurd. From what I read it was mainly the Hindus that were into this, and my understanding is that the Buddha referred to them when saying that rites and rituals don’t lead to enlightenment. However, jsut like the idea of the original mind that some Buddhists believe in seems to be more Hindu than Buddhist, also some of these practices with external objects do not seem to be very different from rites and rituals, as far as I am able to understand.
The Buddha gave us many rites, rituals and protocols to give shape to the holy life, creating a lifestyle more conducive to enlightenment. Getting attached to these brings varying degrees of benefit or harm, depending on the person; but the view that they’ll somehow save us may persist until supramundane view of the path is established.
How is fear of breaking one’s bowl (because you believe it would end your holy life) conducive to your enlightenment?
Well, this is simply a misunderstanding of the term “rights and rituals.”
Things we call “religion” certain have rituals and doctrine, etc, but things we now call “science” do too. Try telling an economist that the anthropological evidence doesn’t support the “money emerged from bartering” myth, and see for yourself how attached they are to their religious dogma!
Some scientists are extremely picky (read: attached) to, e.g. formatting papers “properly” in LaTeX, the order that authors “must” be named, etc etc What is this, but attachment to rituals?
these are good points, I did not think of it in these terms, thank you. The LaTeX example is very good - reminds me of someone I know 
However scientists can be fixated with this kind of things, and economists are certainly dogmatic, but I don’t think they believe that these ideas they are dogmatic about leads to elightenment, which is what we were discussing insofar as @Charlotteannun wrote that we all believe rites and rituals lead to enlightnement unless we are stream winners. Most scientists would not believe that there is such thing as enlightenement, and if they did, I doubt that they would believe that using LaTeX rather than Word is conducive to it.
Some may not. I’ve always held a questioning attitude about these. When buddhists offer flowers, and incense to a stair of the Buddha we do not believe the Buddha statue is alive or that it is able to accept the offering. It is rather a symbolic act of gratitude. The increase stick is a symbol for virtue and the flower, a symbol for impermanence. There maybe some people who are as or more virtuous as a stream entrant or as generous as one. Stream entrants don’t have a monopoly on wholesome qualities.
Sorry Stef, I was writing too briefly (overly focused on the context raised by the question), so your objection is quite valid.
Take the phrase “rites & rituals” as broadly as possible, to mean any view of external actions or forces or beings or conditions being able to bring permanent benefits particularly some sort of salvation/ Nibbana. Include materialism. Include even the flip side of holding to denial that there can be any sort of salvation/ enlightenment. Once this fetter is broken, a person can never mistake anything else for actual mental cultivation (bhavana) that leads to Nibbana.
The truth is that salvation/Nibbana is to be found but only through one’s own mental development. An intellectual understanding of this truth is different from the powerful impact of breaking the rites & rituals fetter.
External conditions such as engaging in various rites, rules, rituals, etc, may have a wholesome salutory effect that aid one’s efforts. For that reason, some sincere practitioners may cling to them. Even one who has broken through the rites & rituals fetter may still cling to various rites, rules, rituals & protocols - the difference is that he will never mistake any these for the path itself.
[Edited to add “Include materialism.” Then re-edited to put this edit note here.]
Lol! I think you’d have to ask that Vietnamese bhikkhuni this question! But I think she was pointing out this tradition as a problem of cultural pressure giving dire consequences, rather than actual spiritual cause & effect.
Yeah, that’s my understanding too @Charlotteannun. We have to understand “attachment to rights and rituals” in its broadest sense.
Take for example the ritual of brushing your teeth before bed.
Now, it’s a good ritual to practice, as far as dental hygiene goes!
But to be attached to the ritual means that we get upset when the ritual isn’t followed. Do you ever forget to brush your teeth and then feel guilty about it? I know I do! Or, if you are prevented, by some circumstance, from brushing your teeth for a while, do you get angry and worried and upset?
That’s attachment to ritual.
A stream enterer has tasted for herself that there is something beyond this physical world. Once you really know that your body isn’t you, that you aren’t annihilated with the end of the body, and you overcome your fear of death, will the prospect of your teeth falling out bother you anymore? You’ll have some perspective. “Whatever man, it’s just teeth.”
That kind of “perspective” which deeply knows that the mind is what matters, and all of this physical stuff is just form… That (to my understanding) is what is meant by “overcoming attachment to rights and rituals” 
Mind and matter and that both are causally arisen phenomena, meaning there’s no Self, in either.
In my understanding, an attachment to a ritual is something quite apart from the fetter named “attachment to rites & rituals”. A Stream-enterer (Sotapanna) has broken the fetter, yet still likely suffers from various attachments.
The absence of any such attachment belongs to the Non-returner (anagami).
Attachment to views of self (“there is a self”, “there is no self”, …) is the other fetter! 
The mind (wholesome or unwholesome) is what matters, for
Mind is the forerunner of states.
Mind is chief; and they are mind-made.
If one speaks or acts with a corrupt mind,
Suffering follows as the wheel follows the hoof of the ox.
Mind is the forerunner of states.
Mind is chief, and they are mind-made.
If one speaks or acts with a pure mind,
happiness follows as one’s own never-departing shadow.
The fetter of “attachment to rites & rituals” refers to a profound underlying pervasive misunderstanding of cause & effect in regards to enlightenment.
[Edit: adding @Khemarato.bhikkhu, @anon38204780 , @Mat ]
Yeah, I think that’s right. As my teacher puts it, a stream enterer cuts attachment to their own body, and an anagami cuts attachment to bodies in general.
While I’m doubtful that it’s limited to “in regards to enlightenment” only (for the reasons @anon38204780 astutely pointed out above), I cannot say for certain, and I will simply have to take you on your word that you of what you speak, and thank you for sharing your wisdom.
Now, as for me, back to the cushion!