The Vinaya
is the heart of Buddhism that keeps it alive and healthy. It pumps the
life-giving blood of self-discipline and awareness to every corner of the
Buddhist community. Although the Vinaya is meant for monks, nuns, and novices,
it concerns the whole Buddhist community, as the Saṅgha cannot survive without
lay support, and the laity need the guidance of virtuous monks.
There is no esoteric teaching in
Buddhism, anyone can study the Vinaya if they wish. However, one should be
careful when interpreting the Vinaya because the consequences of superficial
knowledge can be dire. For example, groundlessly accusing an innocent monk as
immoral will lead to hell, unless one retracts the accusation. In this context,
innocent only means that he is not guilty of an offence of defeat. It is like
acting as judge and jury in criminal matters, and lynching an innocent person
accused of a crime. Even if a person is of weak character, he is not
automatically guilty of all accusations that might be made against him. A proper
investigation must be made, and the accused must be judged and sentenced by
those with a thorough knowledge of the law. Even then, the innocent can
sometimes be wrongly convicted. The guilty cannot escape from the results of
their own kamma, so they should reflect on this, and own up to any wrong-doing
to mitigate its effects.
The Vinaya is a legal system for
the administration of the Saṅgha. It provides clear guidelines for monks to
train themselves on the path to nibbāna. The primary responsibility lies with
each monk to train himself to the best of his ability. His fellow monks may
admonish him if they think he is amenable to advice. If lay people have a sound
basic knowledge of the Vinaya, they will know how to deal with awkward
situations without making unwholesome kamma or causing offence.
Mature lay people should study
the Vinaya to help preserve the Dhamma for future generations. The Buddha laid
down most rules after complaints by lay people that the monks were “behaving
just like lay people who indulge in sensual pleasures.” Corruption and
wrong-doing thrive in secrecy — purity and virtue prosper with openness.
I will begin by summarising the
various grades of offences, defining which are lesser and minor offences. I will
quote a key passage from the Sutta Piṭaka to show why the Vinaya is so vital to
the health of Buddhism. Then I will outline a few Vinaya rules most likely to
affect lay people, especially those concerning the offering of food and other
requisites.
Finally, I will explain how the
minor rules and duties can help a monk or a lay person to become a refined and
cultured Buddhist.
There are several grades of
offence, each requiring a different punishment or remedy to purify it. The most
serious entail disrobing, while the least serious just need to be
acknowledged.
There are four offences of
defeat: sexual intercourse, stealing, intentionally killing a human being, and
making a false claim to supramundane attainments. A monk who has committed
any of these offences is defeated and no longer entitled to wear the robe. After
confessing his offence, he must disrobe and cannot ordain again. The burden of
responsibility lies with an individual bhikkhu to confess his offence. If he
does not admit defeat, he cannot be made to disrobe on circumstantial
evidence.
For example, even if a bhikkhu
has spent the whole night alone with a woman, unless he had sexual intercourse,
he is not guilty of defeat. He is like a warrior wounded in battle, who may die
from his injuries, but he is not dead yet. If he makes a full recovery, he may
be a better warrior than before. Though a monk may be guilty of many serious
offences, if he is not defeated, he is still a monk. If he was mad at the time,
whatever he did, he is not defeated, and there is no offence!
If a monk tells a deliberate lie
to get something, he may not be guilty of stealing, but only of deliberate
lying. The Vinaya is different to secular law. A monk found guilty of receiving
stolen goods in a court of law might not be guilty of any offence according to
the Vinaya. Each case must be judged on its merits by monks learned in the
Vinaya, and a just decision must be made.
If a monk tries to kill a human
being, speaks in praise of death, or recommends abortion, and if that person
dies or a woman has an abortion following his advice, he is guilty of defeat.
Human life is precious, however painful and difficult it may be, since it is a
unique opportunity to gain profound insights by practising the Dhamma. No
Buddhist should ever speak in praise of destroying life. Even recommending a
swift execution or euthanasia can result in defeat for a monk.
If a monk falsely claims to have
attained the Path, its Fruition, nibbāna, jhāna, or psychic powers, though he
has no such attainment, unless it is a through over-estimation, he is also
defeated.
These four offences are the most
serious that a monk can commit. If a monk accuses another monk of one of these
offences, without grounds for suspicion, he is himself guilty of an offence
requiring a formal meeting of the Saṅgha. Intention is crucial. Scolding a monk
with harsh words, “You are not a monk,” when he is not behaving at all like a
monk, to arouse a sense of shame, is not an accusation of defeat. One should
weigh up all the facts very carefully indeed before making such a serious
accusation against a bhikkhu, as the following story from the Dhammapada
Commentary graphically illustrates.
An Arahant went for alms to the
house of a jeweller who was making an ornament for the king with a precious
ruby. While the jeweller was out of the room, his pet heron swallowed the ruby.
When the jeweller returned with
the almsfood, he thought that the Arahant had stolen the ruby. The Arahant
denied it, but the jeweller beat him to elicit a confession, in spite of urgent
protests by his pious wife. In his rage, the jeweller kicked the heron. After
ensuring that the heron was already dead, the Arahant told the jeweller that the
heron had swallowed the ruby. The jeweller cut open the heron and discovered the
ruby. He was distraught when he realised his mistake, and begged for
forgiveness, but nevertheless he fell into hell due to the wickedness of his
actions. The heron was reborn in the womb of the jeweller’s wife, and she was
later reborn in heaven. The Buddha stated the destination of each on being told
what had happened at the jeweller’s house. Then he uttered the following
verse:
“Some are born in a
womb,
The wicked are born in hell,
The pious go to heaven,
The pure attain nibbāna.” (Dhp v 126)
The wicked are born in hell,
The pious go to heaven,
The pure attain nibbāna.” (Dhp v 126)
Thirteen offences require a
formal meeting of the Saṅgha to impose a penance on the offending monk, and to
reinstate him after he has completed the penance to the satisfaction of the
Saṅgha. Reinstatement requires at least twenty bhikkhus, so these offences
are serious. Five deal with sexual offences, two with dwellings, two with
accusing bhikkhus of defeat, two with striving to create schism, and two with
stubborn, shameless behaviour.
These two are not separate
offences, but legal procedures for dealing with accusations by a trustworthy
female lay-disciple who has seen a monk alone with a woman, and suspects he has
committed an offence. For a monk to sit alone with a woman is an offence
requiring expiation. To touch a woman, to use lewd speech, or to speak in praise
of sex, with lustful intent, and to act as a match-maker, require a formal
meeting of the Saṅgha. Sexual intercourse is an offence of defeat.
If a lay supporter suspects that
a serious offence has occurred, he or she should report what was seen, heard, or
suspected to other monks. If the accused monk admits an offence, he should be
dealt with according to the rule. The monks should investigate the matter, and
question the accused monk closely to establish the truth. Their decision depends
on what the bhikkhu admits to, not on what the lay supporter thinks that the
bhikkhu did.
The mind can change very
quickly, so a bhikkhu should try to avoid touching women. Thai bhikkhus use a
receiving cloth when accepting gifts from women, to avoid accidental contact
that might be a serious offence. Burmese monks receive offerings directly from
women, but they are careful to avoid direct contact. Many Sri Lankan monks tie
Paritta threads around the wrists of women, sometimes taking hold of their hands
to do so. The middle way practised by Burmese monks is sensible.
Another point should be
considered here. If others see a monk smiling on touching a woman, they may
suspect him of lustful intent. He may be free from immoral thoughts, but he can
be accused of a serious offence. It is a potentially dangerous situation for all
concerned. The ideal standard is to avoid all suspicion by avoiding all contact
— even eye-contact!
These result from the incomplete
commission of offences of defeat or those requiring formal meeting. For example,
if a bhikkhu tries to kill a human being but fails, or if, with lustful intent,
he touches the hem of a woman’s clothing, it is a grave offence. Clearly, these
are neither lesser, nor minor offences.
Bhikkhus are entirely dependent
on lay devotees to provide the necessities of life. They should be easily
contented and must know the proper limit in accepting things, even when invited
to accept whatever they want. Requisites should be shared without miserliness.
Bhikkhus may exchange things with bhikkhus, novices, or nuns, but not with lay
people. Monks should not give gifts to lay people to gain favours. However, they
can give things to temple attendants and others who serve the Saṅgha, and may
support their parents if they are needy. Monks should not act in a servile way
towards lay people, e.g. by preparing drinks for them, conveying messages for
them, or flattering them. Such ingratiating actions are wrong livelihood for a
bhikkhu.
If a bhikkhu receives anything
in an improper way, such as by exchanging goods with lay people, it must be
forfeited to another monk. Allowable requisites such as robes or almsfood can be
returned to the offending monk. Non-allowable requisites such as money, or goods
purchased with money, must be disposed of. (Venerable Sāriputta once told
Venerable Moggallāna to throw away some rice gruel obtained by a deity’s
intervention.)
Money must be forfeited to the
Saṅgha, not to an individual bhikkhu. The Saṅgha should give it to a lay person
if one is present. If the lay person asks what should be done with it, the monks
can say what would be useful. The offending monk cannot use anything purchased
with the forfeited money, though the other monks may. If no lay person is
available, the money must be thrown away outside the monastery by a trustworthy
monk. Even if a monk accepts money unknowingly, he still falls into the same
offence, and the above procedure should be followed, so concealing money in an
envelope or package is worse than offering it openly. Even an Arahant or a
scrupulous bhikkhu may fall into an offence if he thinks that the envelope
contains something allowable (a cheque made payable to a lay person who is the
bhikkhu's attendant is allowable, but not a cheque made payable to a bhikkhu).
The offence comes from
ownership of money, not from touching it. If a monk finds money in his own
monastery he must pick it up, and keep it in a safe place until the owner claims
it.
If a donor wishes to offer
something to a monk, but does not know what he needs, or is too busy to buy it
for him, it is allowable to give money to a trusted lay person, saying, for
example: “Venerable sir, I have given ten pounds to your attendant, please ask
him for whatever you need.” If the attendant fails to provide what the monk asks
for, he should inform the donor. He should not coerce the attendant into giving
him what he wants. If he does that, he falls into an offence requiring expiation
with forfeiture. The money does not belong to the monk, nor to the attendant,
but still belongs to the donor. The attendant is acting as a Trustee for the
donor. Any breach of that trust is therefore nothing to do with the monk. This
rule, which is the longest in the Pāṭimokkha, makes it crystal clear that
neither ownership of money, nor control over it is allowable for monks.
Some monks maintain that a
bank’s employees are acting as the monk’s attendant when he signs cheques or
uses a credit card. This is incorrect, as the monk has legal control over the
funds, unless the account requires the signature of at least one lay person. A
monk can countersign a cheque to authorise a lay person to use such
funds.
A donor can make a specific
invitation to provide transport, medicine, almsfood, service, etc. In the case
of an invitation to accept medicine, a monk can accept an invitation for four
months. If he accepts an invitation for longer than that, unless it is a
repeated invitation, or a lifelong invitation, it is an offence entailing
expiation.
A monk’s livelihood is defiled
by offences requiring expiation with forfeiture, so they are not minor offences.
Scrupulous monks are totally dependent on charity that is freely given by
devotees wishing for merit. If donors offer what is not allowable, monks should
refuse it, and explain the Vinaya rule unless there is a good reason not to.
Monks who obtain requisites improperly, corrupt the donors and harm the
reputation of the Saṅgha.
Donors will not want to make
demerit by offering unallowable things to monks, so they should know clearly
what is allowable and what is not allowable.
Here, I must digress to clarify
how one can make demerit by giving, as many people may be doubtful about this.
There are two kinds of donation: dhammadāna and adhammadāna — righteous
giving and unrighteous giving. The first is always meritorious, while the second
is demeritorious.
How can giving result in
demerit? If something corrupts the morality of others it should not be given. If
it is given, it results in demerit. Alcohol, weapons, and poison should not be
given. Animals for slaughter should not be given. Prostitutes should not be
given. Foolish entertainments and pornography should not be given. Bribes should
not be given. Giving such things is demeritorious.
Whatever is not allowable for
monks should not be given to them. Money should not be given, almsfood should
not be given at the wrong time. Music and entertainments should not be given.
The meat of animals killed for the purpose of giving alms should not be
given.
In the Jīvaka Sutta of the
Majjhimanikāya, the Buddha said, “Whoever offers to the Tathāgata or to his
disciples what is not allowable makes much demerit.” Here, the Buddha did not
say, “meat that is not allowable,” but just “what is not allowable,” so we
should take this as an inclusive statement. The Pāḷi word used here for ‘offer’
is ‘āsādeti,’ which means ‘invite to accept.’ So demerit is made even if a monk
refuses what is offered.
If you consider the awkward
position that a scrupulous monk faces when offered unallowable things, then you
should be able to appreciate that urging him to break his precepts is a
demeritorious deed. It is like offering a bribe to an honest official. Even if a
monk is unscrupulous, condoning and supporting his shameless behaviour cannot be
a meritorious deed. Such actions fly in the face of the commands given by the
Omniscient Buddha when he laid down the training rules for his ordained
disciples.
Present-day Buddhists can no
longer discern right from wrong. For centuries, shameless monks have neglected
the bhikkhus’ training. Shameless preceptors cannot train their disciples
properly, who inevitably become shameless in turn.
Supporters of shameless monks
also become shameless by association. Because they lack a thorough knowledge of
the Dhamma-Vinaya, they become partial towards shameless monks who flatter them
for their generosity and kindness, and look down on scrupulous monks who
admonish them to talk less, to restrain their senses, and to practise meditation
diligently. Thus the true Dhamma has almost disappeared. It is primarily the
fault of those monks who refuse to follow the training rules laid down by the
Omniscient Buddha, but infatuated lay people who do not wish to abandon craving
and ignorance are also blameworthy, and guilty of complicity.
To ‘expiate’ means to make
amends. Having fallen into one of these offences, a monk should approach another
monk, put his robe over one shoulder, pay respects (if the other monk is
senior), and confess the offence, undertaking to restrain himself in future.
This section of the Pāṭimokkha contains ninety-two training rules. Some
offences, such as killing, lying, abusing, slandering, and drinking alcohol,
are faults for lay people as well as for monks. Most, such as digging the earth,
damaging vegetation, playing in the water, sleeping under the same roof as a
woman, are not faults for lay people. These rules define the proper code of
behaviour for one who is dependent on alms, who has renounced sensual pleasures
to strive for nibbāna, and so is worthy of special respect. They are
fundamental to the training.
The training rules were laid
down by the Buddha after lay people complained about monks behaving “like
householders who enjoy sensual pleasures.” If monks do not follow the training
rules, respect for the Saṅgha will diminish. Lay people will not show due
respect, and the monks will not be able to instruct them in the way to nibbāna,
since they themselves are not striving for it.
“One should first establish
oneself in what is proper,
then only should one instruct another.
Such a wise man will not be reproached.” (Dhp v 158)
then only should one instruct another.
Such a wise man will not be reproached.” (Dhp v 158)
“Should one see a wise man
who, as if indicating a hidden treasure,
points out faults and reproves, let one associate with such a wise man;
it will be better, not worse, for him who associates with such a one.”
points out faults and reproves, let one associate with such a wise man;
it will be better, not worse, for him who associates with such a one.”
“Let him advise, instruct,
and dissuade one from evil.
Truly pleasing is he to the good, displeasing is he to the bad.” (Dhp vv 76-77)
Truly pleasing is he to the good, displeasing is he to the bad.” (Dhp vv 76-77)
When the Vinaya is lost, the
Dhamma is also lost. Donors will give gifts to gain praise and favour. Monks
will look for and favour wealthy donors, and both monks and the laity will
become corrupt.
Two of these four offences no
longer apply, since the fully ordained female Saṅgha (bhikkhuṇī) no longer
exists. A third prohibits a monk from asking for things from lay disciples who
are agreed upon by the Saṅgha as Noble Ones, so it rarely applies nowadays.
However, a monk should know the proper limit when accepting from pious devotees
who offer more than they can afford. The fourth applies to monks staying in
remote places that might be dangerous for lay people to visit due to wild beasts
or thieves.
Although these rules rarely
apply nowadays, failure to observe them can have serious consequences, so they
are not minor offences, and should be avoided.
Seventy-five training rules
concern etiquette and decorum. Monks should train themselves to become serene
and dignified, to inspire faith in lay devotees. If these rules are broken due
to unmindfulness, there is no offence. However, if a monk shows disrespect to
the training rule or to a monk who reminds him of the rule, in disrespect there
is an offence requiring expiation.
If a monk commits many offences,
and makes himself difficult to admonish, he should be brought into the midst of
the Saṅgha and reminded of his faults. If he persists, he falls into a serious
offence requiring a formal meeting of the Saṅgha. He can be excommunicated from
the Saṅgha for refusing to acknowledge an offence.
In the infamous dispute at
Kosambī, a monk who was a teacher of the Dhamma neglected to perform the duties
when using the toilet. A Vinaya master who used the toilet after him reminded
him of his oversight, adding that it was no offence if it was done through
unmindfulness. Thus the Dhamma teacher did not confess an offence. The Vinaya
teacher told his pupils that the Dhamma teacher had fallen into an offence. The
Dhamma teacher told his pupils that the Vinaya teacher did not know what was an
offence and what was not.
The pupils quarrelled, and the
dispute escalated out of all proportion, until the Vinaya monks excommunicated
the Dhamma teacher for not confessing his offence.
What we should learn from this
is that even the minor rules are important, but one should maintain a sense of
proportion. A monk should train himself, seeing danger in the slightest fault,
but he should be tolerant and equanimous, though not indifferent. If he thinks
that admonishing others will cause disharmony, he should avoid confrontation,
and look for another way to teach the Vinaya and preserve the true
Dhamma.
Besides the 227 rules in the
Pāṭimokkha that come up for recitation every fortnight, there are countless
other rules for monks to follow. There are duties towards preceptors, teachers,
pupils, and visiting monks. There are duties towards the monastery, in the
dining-hall, and in the bathroom. There are rules concerning the use and
storage of medicines, and about the maintenance of robes and buildings. There
are procedures for the recitation of the Pāṭimokkha rules, and preliminary
duties before the Uposatha Ceremony. Regulations specify how to establish a
boundary (sīma)
within which all monks must gather for the Uposatha. The Vinaya also specifies
the procedure to be followed by the Saṅgha when shameless monks refuse to follow
the training.
Nowadays, most monks do not
fully follow the training rules. The usual excuse is that the Buddha gave the
Saṅgha permission to abolish the lesser and minor training rules, so they
neglect or totally ignore the rules requiring expiation, or expiation with
forfeiture. However, most of these rules are not minor precepts, but fundamental
to the monastic life-style.
There is unanimous agreement
that the offences of defeat are serious offences, and most will agree that
offences requiring a formal meeting of the Saṅgha are also serious, but there
are different opinions regarding the other classes of offences.
Before the Buddha passed away,
he said to the Venerable Ānanda, “After my passing, the Saṅgha may, if it
wishes, abolish the lesser and minor training rules (khuddānukhuddakāni sikkhāpadāni.” D.ii.154) However, the Venerable Ānanda neglected to ask the
Buddha which rules were the lesser and minor precepts. At the first Buddhist
Council, soon after the Buddha’s demise, the five hundred Arahants were also not
unanimous about this matter, and they blamed the Venerable Ānanda for not asking
about it. Some Arahants said, “Apart from the four offences of defeat, the
remainder are lesser and minor.” Others said, “Apart from the four offences of
defeat and the thirteen offences requiring formal meeting, the rest are lesser
and minor.” Others said, “… and the two indeterminate offences, the rest are
lesser and minor.” Others said, “… and the thirty offences requiring expiation
with forfeiture, the rest are lesser and minor offences.” Others said, “… and
the ninety-two offences requiring expiation, the rest are lesser and minor.”
Others said, “… and four offences requiring confession, the rest are lesser and
minor.”
Since there were different
opinions, Venerable Mahākassapa addressed the monks saying: “People will say,
‘While the Buddha was alive the monks followed the training rules, but after his
passing away they do not.’ So we should continue to train ourselves in all of
the precepts.” Thus the five hundred Arahants agreed not to abolish any training
rules. Not one of the later Councils abolished any training rules
either.
That was the decision made by
the five hundred Arahants, and all later Buddhist Councils, so the monks of the
present day must also train themselves in all of the training precepts. There is
no legitimate reason to ignore a single one of them. Nevertheless, one should
distinguish between serious, medium, and minor offences.
In the Milinda Pañha the Arahant
Nāgasena says that the Buddha gave permission to abolish the lesser and minor
rules to test his disciples, as a king on his death-bed might test his sons by
saying, “You can let the border regions go after my death if you wish.” Then the
sons would surely make efforts to subdue the border regions, and even conquer
more territory. Venerable Nāgasena concludes, “The offences of wrong-doing are
the lesser precepts, and offences of wrong speech are the minor precepts.” I
will now show why this is a wise decision.
As already pointed out,
groundlessly accusing a monk of defeat leads to rebirth in hell, unless one
admits the offence and apologises. For a monk, this offence requires a formal
meeting of the Saṅgha.
Causing a schism in the Saṅgha
is heavy kamma that inevitably leads to rebirth in hell. Striving to create a
schism, when admonished by the Saṅgha to desist, is an offence requiring a
formal meeting of the Saṅgha. Clearly, offences that lead to hell or that
require a formal meeting of the Saṅgha are not minor offences.
A novice must observe ten
precepts, which includes not accepting money. If a bhikkhu accepts money, it
must be forfeited to the Saṅgha. The Saṅgha must then give it to a lay person or
appoint a bhikkhu to dispose of it. The money must be thrown away outside the
monastery, taking no notice of where it falls. So offences requiring confession
with forfeiture are not minor, since they deal with a bhikkhu’s correct means of
livelihood, and some donations of the faithful may go to waste.
If a bhikkhu kills an animal,
tells a deliberate lie, abuses, slanders, hits, or threatens a bhikkhu, drinks
intoxicants, or eats after midday, these are offences requiring expiation.
These offences are contrary to the five or eight precepts observed by lay
disciples, temple attendants and nuns, so they are also not minor
offences.
If a bhikkhu who is staying in a
remote area, which is considered dangerous due to wild beasts or robbers,
accepts almsfood in his own place, thus endangering lay supporters who bring it,
it is an offence requiring confession. Since his action endangers the life or
property of lay people, this offence cannot be regarded as minor
either.
If a bhikkhu laughs loudly in
town, if he talks with food in his mouth, if he teaches Dhamma while standing to
one who is sitting, if he urinates while standing — these are offences of
wrong-doing. If he makes a sarcastic remark or tells a joke, it is an offence of
wrong speech. These offences should be avoided too, but they can rightly be
called lesser and minor offences. Having committed any of them, a bhikkhu should
confess his offence, and undertake to restrain himself in the future. He should
not overlook them, nor dismiss them as trivial.
The seventy-second offence
requiring expiation states: “While the Pāṭimokkha is being recited, if any
bhikkhu should say, ‘Why are these lesser and minor training rules recited? They
only lead to worry, bother, and fret’ then in disparaging the training rules
there is an offence requiring expiation.” Thus, the sanctity of the lesser and
minor training rules is protected by a specific offence requiring
expiation.
The seventy-third offence
requiring expiation expects every bhikkhu to be familiar with all of the
training rules included in the Pāṭimokkha (in Pāḷi), within four to six weeks of
his ordination. Claiming ignorance of the rule as a defence requires expiation,
and he is also to be censured by the Saṅgha for his ignorance.
Every fortnight the monks have a
duty to recite the 227 training rules included in the Pāṭimokkha. If there is a
danger to life, or to the holy life, the Pāṭimokkha may be recited in brief,
otherwise it should be recited in full whenever four bhikkhus are present on the
Uposatha day. If no bhikkhu is able to recite it in full, one bhikkhu should go
to learn it, or the bhikkhus should attend the recital in another monastery.
Because the Buddha said, “I allow you, monks, to recite the Pāṭimokkha” the
monks are obliged to recite it, and fall into an offence of wrong-doing if they
fail to recite it without good reason. If they do not have a suitable boundary
(sīma) they
should consecrate one. The Pāṭimokkha recital preserves the vitality of the
Buddha’s teaching, and must not be neglected. As wise lay people will fully
observe the five precepts, wise monks will fully observe the 227
precepts.
The Upāli Sutta from the Gradual
Sayings gives ten reasons why the Pāṭimokkha should be recited.
The Vinaya master, Venerable
Upāli, approached the Blessed One. Having approached, he paid homage and sat at
one side. Sitting there, Venerable Upāli asked the Blessed One: “Seeing how many
benefits has the Blessed One laid down the training rules for his disciples, and
the recital of the Pāṭimokkha?”
“Seeing ten benefits, Upāli, the
Tathāgata has laid down the training rules for his disciples, and the recital of
the Pāṭimokkha.
- For the excellence of the Saṅgha (Saṅghasuṭṭhutāya).
- For the well-being of the Saṅgha (Saṅghaphāsutāya).
- To control wicked individuals (Dummaṅkūnaṃ puggalānaṃ niggahāya).
- For the comfort of well-behaved bhikkhus (Pesalānaṃ bhikkhūnaṃ phāsuvihārāya).
- To restrain present taints (Diṭṭhadhammikānaṃ āsavānaṃ saṃvarāya).
- To prevent the arising of future taints (Samparāyikānaṃ āsavānaṃ paṭighātāya).
- To arouse faith in those who lack faith(Appasannānaṃ pasādāya).
- To strengthen faith in those who have faith(Pasannānaṃ bhiyyobhāvāya).
- To establish the true Dhamma (Saddhammaṭṭhitiyā).
- To support the Vinaya (Vinayānuggahāya).” (A v 70)
Those monks who have no respect
for the training, disparage those who respect it, and neglect the recital of the
Pāṭimokkha, are shameless and wicked individuals. Though some monks fall into
many offences due to shamelessness, if they correct themselves, and respect the
training, they are not wicked.
The Vinaya defines a shameless
monk as follows:
“A shameless monk is one
who, with knowledge of the Vinaya rules, transgresses them and commits offences.
Having committed offences, he then conceals his actions. Moreover, he follows
the four wrong courses of action (i.e. through desire, ill-will, delusion, or
fear).” (Parivāra, Vin.v.158)
Monks who commit offences due to
ignorance of the rules are not shameless, just negligent (new monks who don’t
know the rules yet are not negligent). Monks who knowingly transgress the rules
due to human weakness, are shameless only until they confess their offences.
They are like good citizens who occasionally break the law.
Wicked monks are like criminals
who plead not guilty when charged with some offence, although they are guilty;
or like outlaws who are neither caught nor charged, but who remain at large,
committing further crimes daily. Even if the offences are minor, stubbornness
and shamelessness are obstructions to an individual’s spiritual development, and
wicked monks pose a serious threat to the health and longevity of Buddhism.
Minor offences often lead to major offences.
“Do not disregard evil,
saying, ‘It will not affect me.’
Even a big water-jar is filled by the falling of drops.
Likewise, the fool, gathering little by little, fills himself with evil.” (Dhp v 121)
Even a big water-jar is filled by the falling of drops.
Likewise, the fool, gathering little by little, fills himself with evil.” (Dhp v 121)
Why are there so many rules?
Because human beings have so many defilements.
In the early years of the
Buddha’s dispensation the monks soon became Noble Ones, even Arahants. Such
pure-hearted individuals instinctively knew what was suitable for a recluse, as
they were intent on realising the various stages of the Path. As the years went
by, men began to join the Saṅgha for less noble reasons, and they neglected to
practise meditation. Most of the rules were made due to the shameless behaviour
of the group of six monks. More than two thousand five hundred years since the
Buddha’s demise, the situation has degenerated even further. Monks now need more
rules to protect themselves from the temptations of modern life, not fewer
rules.
Those who advocate relaxing the
rules to suit modern times have not understood the purpose of the Vinaya. The
meaning of the word ‘Pāṭimokkha’ given in the Visuddhimagga is: “Pāṭimokkha is
the virtue of the training precepts; for it frees (mokkheti) him who protects
(pāti) it and
guards it, it sets him free (mocayati) from the pains of
the states of loss, etc., that is why it is called Pāṭimokkha.” (Vism.
16)
Instead of abandoning the rules,
monks need to abandon their pride and attachment. They should have confidence in
the wisdom of the Omniscient Buddha, who laid down the training rules for his
disciples.
It is like the confidence needed
when learning to swim. Poor swimmers are afraid to put their head into the
water, but the head is heavy, and it is hard to hold it out of the water when
swimming. Confident swimmers fully immerse the head in the water, turning the
mouth just enough to breathe, thus they can relax in the water and float
horizontally. They can use all of their strength to propel themselves along,
without any fear of drowning. Monks should suppress their ego and immerse
themselves fully in the monastic discipline, then they will be able to use all
of their strength to study, to teach, or to meditate.
Refer to the Bhaddāli Sutta and
other Suttas in the Bhikkhu Vagga, Majjhimanikāya. The Buddha said to the monks,
“I keep myself healthy by eating only one meal. You should do the same.” When
the monks told Venerable Bhaddāli about this, he declared his inability to
follow that practice. They then advised him to keep back a portion from the
morning meal to eat later (i.e. before midday), but he complained that even that
was too hard. For three months the Buddha said nothing, but he admonished
Venerable Bhaddāli severely at the end of the Rains Retreat: “Surely, Bhaddāli,
a transgression overcame you, in that like a fool, confused and blundering, when
a training precept was being made known by me, you publicly declared in the
Saṅgha of bhikkhus your unwillingness to follow the training.”
(M.i.437)
Monks used to walk for alms soon
after dawn, taking the meal on their return to the monastery or at some suitable
place outside the village. Most monks would have eaten about 9:00 am, well
before noon, and before it started to get uncomfortably hot.
Those who do not wish to follow
the strict one-sessioner’s practice can eat twice or more, but all food must be
finished before midday. For each mouthful taken after midday, a monk should
confess an offence of expiation. If it is after midday, but he thinks it is not,
or if he is doubtful, it is an offence of expiation. If it is before midday, but
he thinks it is not, or if he is doubtful, it is an offence of wrong-doing for
each mouthful. A monk should check the time before eating. If there is no clock,
and he is doubtful about the time, he should not eat.
The Vinaya defines what is food,
what is medicine, and when each can be used. Five ‘medicines’ — ghee, butter,
oil, honey, and sugar — can be kept and used at any time for seven days. Fruit
juice free from pulp can be used until before dawn of the day after accepting
it. Roots, seeds, and leaves that are not used as food can be used as long as
they last. Plain tea or herbal medicines can be taken at any time, but soup can
only be taken before midday, even if it is free from solids. Milk is food, and
so cannot be taken after midday. Horlicks, Ovaltine, and all other drinks
containing food are also food.
Everything taken by the mouth
except water or tooth cleaners must be offered by a lay person or novice, at the
right time. For food, this means after dawn and before midday on the day that it
is to be used. Medicine and fruit juice can be offered at any time. ‘Offered’
means that the donor must come within arms-reach and put it into something held
in a monk’s hands, such as an almsbowl, plate, or tray. Novices can eat food
that is not formally offered, and they can cook food for monks.
Once food or medicine has been
received by a bhikkhu, it can be used at the right time by any bhikkhu, until it
has been discarded. If discarded food is offered again, it may be used, but a
bhikkhu should not store food up to use the following day. Some say that
discarded food should not be used again, but a lot of food would be wasted due
to the absence of beggars and others who eat leftovers. A bhikkhu should be
content to eat any allowable food that is good for his health. If he renounces
the leftover food, it is better to use it up the next day rather than throwing
it away. If he gets annoyed because someone else eats it or throws it away, he
can know that he is guilty of storing up food.
The seven-day medicines may also
be used as food, but once used as food, they cannot later be used as medicine.
What a monk can do, having accepted them, is put aside a portion to use as
medicine, and then use the rest as food. Salt or ginger, kept as lifetime
medicine, cannot be mixed with food. Ginger mixed with sugar can be used as
seven-day medicine, but not lifetime medicine.
Four foods — fish, meat, milk,
and curds (yoghurt) — plus the five medicines are ‘superior’ or ‘luxurious’
foods. A bhikkhu may not request these for his own use, unless he is sick.
‘Sick’ means that he cannot be comfortable without them. If a donor makes an
open invitation to ask for whatever he wants, a bhikkhu can ask for these
superior foods. If donors offer vegetarian food with essential proteins such as
nuts or pulses, a bhikkhu should be able to remain healthy, and all but the
poorest villagers will be able to offer alms without difficulty.
If a bhikkhu sees, hears, or
suspects that an animal has been killed to provide meat for the Saṅgha, he
should refuse it. These days, meat and fish are bought from the supermarket, so
one need not worry about this offence.
The Buddha refused to lay down a
rule forbidding the eating of meat, presumably because this might have prevented
the Dhamma spreading to areas where meat-eating was widespread, or might inhibit
some from joining the Saṅgha. Medical advice is that excessive amounts of meat
and over-eating in general contribute to heart-disease. If he failed to get
alms, the Buddha happily went without food (see the Piṇḍa Sutta, S.i.113, and
cf.
Dhammadāyāda Sutta, M.i.12). He was lean and physically fit.
The Buddha recommended rice
gruel for good digestion. In the West one could use oat-porridge, which helps to
reduce cholesterol. Frugal use of the luxurious foods — ghee, butter, oil,
honey, molasses, meat, fish, milk, and curds — would keep monks healthy and make
them easy to support.
Several rules concerning women
are designed to preserve a monk’s chastity and good reputation. Monks may not
touch women, sit alone with them, arrange to travel with them, sleep under the
same roof as them, or teach Dhamma to them at length unless a man is present who
understands the meaning. However, if a woman asks a question, a monk can answer
in detail. If someone else makes the arrangements, he can travel with a woman,
but not alone with her. If she sits while the bhikkhu walks, or she walks while
the bhikkhu sits, or they sit in separate rooms, or in an open place, not on the
same seat, there is no offence. These rules are not designed to make it
difficult for women to learn and practise the Dhamma, but to restrain
evil-minded men and to forestall gossip.
A monk is not permitted to
damage plants or dig the earth, so lay supporters should maintain the
monastery’s garden by cutting the grass, trimming hedges, weeding flower-beds,
etc. Monks can help by cutting up severed branches, and they can dig earth
without life, e.g. sand or gravel. They can sweep leaves, and rake up grass
cuttings. They can burn garden waste, but only in a place without living things.
In clearing undergrowth, one should avoid destroying nests or eggs. Water
containing living things must be filtered before using it.
Every rule was laid down by the
Buddha out of compassion for living beings. Even the minor rules help to expel
defilements. A lay Buddhist who studies the Vinaya for the right reasons will
gain more reverence for monks, realising how refined and demanding the monastic
training is. To follow the training perfectly requires constant mindfulness,
which prevents the arising of greed, anger, and egoism. Many of the rules are a
useful guide for a lay person who aspires to nibbāna. A ‘recluse’ means one who
sees fear in the cycle of rebirth caused by defilements. A lay person who
strives hard to attain nibbāna is a recluse, but a monk who strives for worldly
aims is more heedless than a lay person.
The Vinaya is a guide to a
virtuous life: showing one how to live without greed, hatred, or delusion, and
how to cultivate renunciation, loving-kindness, and wisdom.
“This is the beginning for a
wise bhikkhu:
sense control, contentment, restraint in the Pāṭimokkha precepts,
association with noble and energetic friends whose livelihood is pure.”
sense control, contentment, restraint in the Pāṭimokkha precepts,
association with noble and energetic friends whose livelihood is pure.”
Be content with what you have,
or whatever people offer you from their own generosity. Share anything you don’t
need with others. Covet nothing that belongs to others. Waste nothing, and
reflect well on gratitude when using the gifts of faith. Live one day at a time.
Needs can easily be fulfilled, but greed is insatiable. You won’t die if you go
one day without food, but if you are overwhelmed by greed just once, it can
destroy your life.
Guard your mind well against
anger. Practise tolerance and patience to the highest possible extent. Ward off
ill-will and selfishness by doing noble-minded deeds for the welfare of others.
Revere and show due respect to the learned, pious, and virtuous: without
partiality or prejudice. If others lack these basic virtues, they deserve
compassion, since they are heading towards suffering. Avoid wicked individuals
as far as possible, they are a danger to your happiness. Protect yourself from
them by practising forbearance and equanimity. All beings are heirs of their own
kamma, and must inherit its results.
Know one thing: you don’t know
anything until you are enlightened. If you have not yet attained right view,
what are you doing to rectify this appalling ignorance? Do you enjoy reading
Dhamma books, or do you prefer newspapers and magazines? Do you meditate
frequently, or only when the mood takes you? Is your conversation usually about
politics, food, and material things, or is it mere gossip and idle chatter? It
is better to remain silent than to make unwholesome kamma. To criticise
shamelessness and negligence is right, but do not get caught in your own net, or
you will drown in defilements. Do you like to stay alone, or are you never happy
without company? A refined Buddhist delights in solitude, renunciation, learning
Dhamma, meditation, and silence, which are indispensable to develop
concentration and insight.
Be mindful at all times. If you
leave a mess for others to clean up, and let others do what you should do
yourself, you have missed the right path, which is only for the diligent. If you
have never practised mindfulness meditation intensively, you have certainly been
negligent, so be ready to admit it. Confess any offences immediately — a man who
cannot make a mistake, cannot make anything.
“The bhikkhu who delights in
heedfulness,
and looks with fear on heedlessness,
is not liable to fall;
he is in the presence of nibbāna.”
and looks with fear on heedlessness,
is not liable to fall;
he is in the presence of nibbāna.”
“Not insulting, nor harming,
restrained by the Pāṭimokkha.
Moderation in food, a secluded abode, intent on higher thought —
this is the teaching of the Buddhas.” END=NAM MO SAKYAMUNI BUDDHA.( 3 TIMES ).WORLD VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST ORDER=VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST NUN=GOLDEN LOTUS MONASTERY=AUSTRALIA,SYDNEY.15/10/2013.THICH CHAN TANH.THE MIND OF ENLIGHTMENT.
Moderation in food, a secluded abode, intent on higher thought —
this is the teaching of the Buddhas.” END=NAM MO SAKYAMUNI BUDDHA.( 3 TIMES ).WORLD VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST ORDER=VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST NUN=GOLDEN LOTUS MONASTERY=AUSTRALIA,SYDNEY.15/10/2013.THICH CHAN TANH.THE MIND OF ENLIGHTMENT.
No comments:
Post a Comment