Welcome home! Please contact
lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site.
New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days.
Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Monks, lay practioners, and self-sufficiency
Hi all,
After years of sporadic study, I've finally decided to call myself a Buddhist. One thing has been bothering me though...
I really respect those who choose to lead the spiritual life of a monk or a nun. I don't think I could do it. I certainly don't intend to try in this life. But why are there so many Buddhist monks/nuns that rely solely on charity? Why are they not more self-sufficient? I have been raised in America, where self-sufficiency is very much an ideal in all of the dominant segments of society. It is also an ideal I strongly accept for myself.
My knowledge of Buddhist scriptures is very limited. I am familiar with the Dhammapada (which is the book that led me to Buddhism in the first place). I am vaguely familiar with the Eight-fold Path, along with very basic teaching from books and online. So please understand I do not fully know the reasoning behind monastic life.
So is there any insight you can offer me? Are all monasteries totally dependent on charity? I seem to remember something about some Zen monasteries supporting themselves--I found it on a random web search but cannot recall the source, so I'm not sure I'm right about that.
Thanks for any and all info you can give!
0
Comments
This system of economic dependence has been in place since the very beginning, since the Buddha walked the roads of Northern India. It offers a double advantage over self-sufficiency, one for the monastics and one for lay people. The monastics need to spend less time with upkeep and have more time for practicing the teaching the dhamma. The lay people are given extended opportunity for merit making and they are provided with the services of the monastery in return.
This system of reciprocity has been established since time immemorial in Asia. In the traditional villages of Buddhist countries, the temples often have a secondary function as school, library, sick-nursing practice, welfare centre, counselling service, or some similar social function, especially those temples located in populated areas. If monks wanted to concentrate on meditation practice, they often had to leave these places and seek out remote temples or go to the forests or caves.
Although there may be some remote temples with near self-sufficiency, it is generally impractical without the direct support from lay stewards, because the monk rules forbid many types of economic activities, such as storing food, or carrying/accepting money. This means the monks themselves can't engage meaningfully in economic activities.
Cheers, Thomas
So it's all sort of a social contract between laity and monks/nuns, then? Laity supports monks, who are kept in situations that are conducive to enlightenment. In return, the monks teach laity so that they, too, progress further on the spiritual path. Sort of a tit for tat, in a way. Am I right?
I am a monk. Have been for 24 years. I am an American and had an American teacher. We are close to self-sufficient. We do not rely on donations. Here is a story about our monastery that i posted here awhile back....http://newbuddhist.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5744
good luck to you!!
Dennis