[Buddha-l] Re: Rational or mythological Buddhism andWesternBuddhist lay practice

jkirk jkirk at spro.net
Mon Mar 28 09:36:03 MST 2005


JK
> With all due respect, I don't see why merely having wives, mistresses or
> pets would, in and of themselves, impede begging. Beggars throughout
> history have had wives and children, whom they often inveigled into
begging
> as well.
RH
> Religious mendicants in Magadha at the time of the Buddha were expected
> to be celibate. If you read the commentaries to the vinaya rules you
> find it said again and again that Buddhist monks were expected to follow
> various rules, lest the village people talk. Apparently one of the
> things that caused villagers to talk was religious beggars who had
> families to support. Moreverover, the Buddha seems to have been mindful
> of taking precautions against his community being any kind of burden on
> the supporting community. That is the reason for celibacy stated in the
> vinaya.
JK
I was not suggesting that this important consideration was not relevant, I
simply
added to it with more sociological suggestions.
>
> > No, the reasons for requiring celibacy were otherwise, most importantly
> > perhaps that married men with children could not be expected to submit
to
> > the routines nor the discipline of monastic communitarian living.
 RH
> That reason is not the one given in the vinaya. Of course, the vinaya
> may have been lying.
JK
     I was not responding to the issue according to what's in the rules,
that should have been clear, but instead from a more sociological point of
view.

> > I daresay the women would not have put up with monasticism, either!
RH
> Why not? Don't you think some women would prefer a well-behaved husband
> to a gambler, drinker and womanizer?
JK
    Gambling, drinking and womanizing have never been far from some denizens
of   monasteries no matter what the affiliation. Vide the Thai sangha of
late.




More information about the buddha-l mailing list