Hello,
I've just completed Unit 7 in History of Indian Buddhism - BH6103, and there is quite a lot of information about the rules that monks and nuns should follow. Along with information about the rules is information about the punishments, and this surprised me a bit. If a person wants to lead a spiritual life as a monk or nun, and maintain a path towards a goal of enlightenment, why would there need to be so many rules? And more so, why punishments? I would expect that a community of monks or nuns living together with the same goal would not create the type of environment for punishable mistakes. Does it have to do with the culture and climate at the time of the Buddha? In my readings, it seems to be a more civilized time than what we live in now, so this adds more to my surprise. I appreciate everyone's thoughts on this.
Thanks!
-PHIL
Follow-up - Dalai Lama quote
Today I received another answer viewpoint to my question from my Dalai Lama quote-a-day calendar:
"Buddha set forth styles of behavior in order to improve our welfare, not to give us a hard time. The rules themselves make the mind conducive to spiritual progress." September 26th, 2011.
:-)
-PHIL
Rules and punishments
I get the sense from external readings in this area that many of the rules were developed ad hoc by the Buddha as events occurred. It seems that there was major effort on the part of the Buddha to ensure that the sangha maintained good relations with the lay community, which was a source of support, and also that there were political implications, given the Buddha''s role as an advisor to wealthy householders and even kings.
I also think that whenever you get a group of people living together, the sad reality is that not everyone will act in appropriately. As the size of the sangha grew, clearly a need for management arose. We have also read, although this was a later occurrence, that some people joined the community for their own reasons, not because they were true followers. Some were actually followers of other sects that had less wealth than the Buddha had attracted, so wanted the benefits without the perceived burdens. In fact this was one of the stated reasons for the First Council.
In the case of Ananda, one can imagine a lot of jealousy directed towards him given his close
association with the Buddha, and a tendency to blame him for the Buddha''s death and/or other
perceived failings in the community. But, the process seemed to allow him to explain himself, and
the fact that he did not have evil intentions to be considered blameless for what occurred. But it
seems that engagement in the process was important.
I think too that not everyone residing in the community was fully realized, so had their faults like
anyone. This seems apparent with the monk Channa, who was supposed to be punished for
arrogance, but repented and became an arhant and then was beyond punishment.
Anyway, in a book entitled Buddhist Monastic Life by Mohan Wijayaratna (Cambridge University
Press 1990), the author writes that the rules of the Community were established with ten intentions
I (Vin III 21; IV 91, 120, 182, 299):
1. Protecting the Community
2. Insuring the Community's comfort
3. Warding off I'll-meaning people
4. Helping well-behaved monks and nuns
5. Destroying present defilements
6. Preventing future defilements
7. Benefitting non-followers
8. Increasing the number of followers
9. Establishing the Discipline
10. Observing the rules of restraint
Wijayaratna points out that eight of the ten rules are designed to address the internal relationship of the monks and the external relationship of the monks with the larger community. So only two were
actually aimed at addressing individual defilements. Uposatha, which appears to be a form of public
confession, was probably the most expedient means of addressing transgressions among the
faithful, but I believe this was only available to the fully ordained.
I find this a very interesting area, and look forward to other's comments. Thank you for this posting.
Rules and punishments
I get the sense from external readings in this area that many of the rules were developed ad hoc by the Buddha as events occurred. It seems that there was major effort on the part of the Buddha to ensure that the sangha maintained good relations with the lay community, which was a source of support, and also that there were political implications, given the Buddha''s role as an advisor to wealthy householders and even kings.
I also think that whenever you get a group of people living together, the sad reality is that not everyone will act in appropriately. As the size of the sangha grew, clearly a need for management arose. We have also read, although this was a later occurrence, that some people joined the community for their own reasons, not because they were true followers. Some were actually followers of other sects that had less wealth than the Buddha had attracted, so wanted the benefits without the perceived burdens. In fact this was one of the stated reasons for the First Council.
In the case of Ananda, one can imagine a lot of jealousy directed towards him given his close
association with the Buddha, and a tendency to blame him for the Buddha''s death and/or other perceived failings in the community. But, the process seemed to allow him to explain himself, and
the fact that he did not have evil intentions to be considered blameless for what occurred. But it
seems that engagement in the process was important.
I think too that not everyone residing in the community was fully realized, so had their faults like
anyone. This seems apparent with the monk Channa, who was supposed to be punished for
arrogance, but repented and became an arhant and then was beyond punishment.
Anyway, in a book entitled Buddhist Monastic Life by Mohan Wijayaratna (Cambridge University
Press 1990), the author wires that the rules of the Community were established with ten intentions (Vin III 21; IV 91, 120, 182, 299)
1. Protecting the Community
2. Insuring the Community's comfort
3. Warding off I'll-meaning people
4. Helping well-behaved monks and nuns
5. Destroying present defilements
6. Preventing future defilements
7. Benefitting non-followers
8. Increasing the number of followers
9. Establishing the Discipline
10. Observing the rules of restraint
Wijayaratna points out that eight of the ten rules are designed to address the internal relationship of the monks and the external relationship of the monks with the larger community. So only two were actually aimed at addressing individual defilements. Uposatha, which appears to be a form of public confession, was probably the most expedient means of addressing transgressions among the faithful, but I believe this was only available to the fully ordained.
I find this a very interesting area, and look forward to other's comments. Thank you for this posting
Insights
Thank you very much for your insights, Diana! I will seek out the book you cited, as it looks like a good fit for my growing Buddhist library. :-)
Cheers!
-PHIL
similar experience
I had a similar experience when reading in unit 2 about the bogus accusations of the Arahants against Ananda in the first council.
The fact of making false accusations made them seem so human, falible, judgmental perhaps even envious of Ananda.
A revelation of the residue of Karmic forces still present and acting in the members of the fist council.
Nibbana with residue seems to explain the tendencies towards human fragility present in enlightened beings.
Kind regards