Lay and monastic rights
Ken O'Neill queried the relevance of the lay/monastic distinction and said : 'Setting monastics up as separate from others... has done Buddhist tradition a lot of damage by creating unneccessary hierarchies'.
The role of being a //bhikkhu// or //bhikkhunii// was instituted by the Buddha. He intended them to be //different// from lay people but not //separate// from them: they should be interdependent with them. Laity give material support, and monastic //Sangha// return teaching, inspiration and advise. This inter-dependent relationship was largely preserved in Theravaada countries, but it appears that in several Mahaayaana ones, monks became somewhat isolated from the laity.
Peter Harvey
Peter Harvey writes:
>Ken O'Neill queried the relevance of the lay/monastic distinction and said :
>'Setting monastics up as separate from others... has done Buddhist tradition a lot of damage by creating unneccessary hierarchies'.
>The role of being a //bhikkhu// or //bhikkhunii// was instituted by the Buddha. He intended them to be //different// from lay people but not //separate// from them: they should be interdependent with them. Laity give material support, and monastic //Sangha// return teaching, inspiration and advise. This inter-dependent relationship was largely preserved in Theravaada countries, but it appears that in several Mahaayaana ones, monks became somewhat isolated from the laity.
Peter:
Refer only to Ms Magazine several monks ago for a charming article on the human rights violation of Shri Lankhan monks against women. Not only are they denied ordination, but subject to rape and other abuses by monks stitched into the dominant power structure. More than a few scandals loom in the codependency of monks and laiety in Theravadin countries. It seems to me that when international news reports on scandals in Buddhism, it reports on the conduct of monks!
The Buddha may well have initiated monasticism, along with parts of a vinaya that applied to existential circumstances unique to his limited experience in a small portion of norther india. The two schisms separating Theravada's remote ancestors from what became mahayana had much to do with following the letter of the law or its spirit. That buddhism spread beyond cultures effect by the Indian subcontinent largely resulted from mahayana's flexible application of buddhist principles. Perpetuity of buddhism doesn't depend on monks; instead it depends on people awakening, applying that awakening to the lives.
Gassho,
Ken O'Neill
Ken O'Neill refers to an Ms Magazine article 'on the human rights violation of Shri Lankan monks against women. Not only are they denied ordination, but [are] subject to rape and other abuses by monks stitched into the dominant power structure. More than a few scandals loom in the coodependency of monks and laity in Theravaadin countries'.
If a monk is guilty of raping someone then, not only should he be jailed, but the monastic discipline demands that he be expelled from the monastic //Sangha// without possibility of re-instatement in the present life. Many monastic rules are specifically designed to guard against sexual improprieties. I hear than largely non-monastic American Buddhism has suffered from rather a lot of these??
On the issue of the re-instatement of the //bhikkhunii// ordination line: a) In Theravaada lands, Sri Lankans seem to be those who are keenest to bring this about: though there are those who disagree. b) If monasticism is such a dodgy thing, then women are not losing out by being currently unable to ordain as Theravaadin //bhikkuniis//!
Peter Harvey