Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
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.

If everyone becomes a monk, who is going to work?

hermitwinhermitwin Veteran
edited February 2011 in Buddhism Basics
Some one needs to produce food , rite?

Comments

  • robotrobot Veteran
    That would be me.
  • Ada_BAda_B
    Most people aren't monks, and most people won't be monks or have no desire to be monks. So there isn't a problem.
  • zenffzenff Veteran
    And also monks often do a considerable amount of work.
    They just don’t get paid for it properly.
  • CloudCloud Veteran
    What are the chances everyone in the world would be a monk? :)
  • SherabDorjeSherabDorje
    What are the chances everyone in the world would be a monk? :)
    And if everyone in the world became a monk, then it would be obvious that they'd have to work.

    I myself believe that monks should work enough to be at least self-sufficient, on a communal garden in the monastery, sewing, doing laundry, etc.
  • SabreSabre Veteran
    By being dependent on others monks don't loose contact with the outside world and get confronted with interconnectedness. I think that's a great thing.

    If everybody becomes a monk, monks will do the work because bread doesn't bake itself :D
  • compassionate_warriorcompassionate_warrior Veteran
    edited February 2011
    Let's stop and think about this question. The world isn't made up of males only. 51% of the population is female. Do you mean to include women in your question: "If everyone becomes a monk or nun"? Or did you intend for women to do the work?

    And if everyone became a monk, the population would crash, and ultimately there would be no one left to feed and clothe. Unless some of the monks fudged on their celibacy vows.
  • zenffzenff Veteran

    ...
    And if everyone became a monk, the population would crash, and ultimately there would be no one left to feed and clothe. Unless some of the monks fudged on their celibacy vows.
    Count on it!
    :D
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    "If all the world were paper,
    And all the seas were ink,
    And all the trees
    were bread and cheese
    - what would we have to drink?"
  • zenffzenff Veteran
    "If all the world were paper,
    And all the seas were ink,
    And all the trees
    were bread and cheese
    - what would we have to drink?"
    Wow! Is that your poem?
  • taiyakitaiyaki Veteran
    Self sustaining everything. Think about it. Monks equal free labor. Think about it.
  • compassionate_warriorcompassionate_warrior Veteran
    Self sustaining everything. Think about it. Monks equal free labor. Think about it.
    Well, I think the point was that monks, in some traditions at least, haven't been too inclined toward labor. But the potential is definitely there. The celibate Shakers eventually had some of the most affluent communities in the US, due to their view of labor as devotion. "Hands to work, hearts to God" was the slogan. (Marx picked up on this, but it didn't work out the same in Russia, somehow...but I digress. ) ;)
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited February 2011
    No, not my poem.....
    But I think it wonderfully illustrates what a hopelessly ridiculous question the OP has asked.....

    Hermitwin is prone to asking some really odd ones, but even I have to admit - that one's a doozie.... :rolleyes:
  • hermitwinhermitwin Veteran
    At some point , before the communist revolution, Monggolia had 40% (cant remember exactly) of its male population living as monks. It would be have been a good case study of how the society coped.
  • DakiniDakini Veteran
    edited February 2011
    Nearly all the rest of society were herders. Possibly the monasteries had serfs who herded sheep for them, as in Tibet the serfs grew food for the monasteries. A few rich herders and headmen probably contributed to supporting the monasteries. And as in Tibet, some monasteries were probably involved in trade. But monastic life was hard, in that food was (and still is, for monasteries in India and Nepal) scarce, clothing old and worn, luxuries only for the high lamas.

    I've read differing statistics re: Tibet, anywhere from 20% of the male population to around 30% were monastics. That left a lot of single women.
  • DisneyDisney
    edited February 2011
    Many bodies just needs simple crops and a roof to live, and monks of the great old day live on simple crop farming. Modern days living make the monks even more convenient as they can concentrate on sutra and meditation as all other chores such as crop farming is loved by living beings who desired for worldly matter. The sea, land and air creatures would be happier as there is no intrusion from human, and the air and environment is free from pollutions. The earth is another lovely pasture even for the aliens as technology has corrupted their mind and they possibly looking for another green pasture to look within :vimp:
  • DharmaFieldDharmaField
    edited February 2011
    This discussion is not about a moot point, unles you believe that you are one of the chosen few who by chance of your good karma are a Buddhist and hence think that monastic life is the next step up in the Buddhist chain of being. Monastic communities who don't work are necessarily a burden to society, nonetheless they provide some service in kind and are tolerated and well regarded in small doses. The view of karmic merit is central to their survival and this requires a believing population - as anthropologists who researched Asian society found that locals sacrificed a great deal of their income on the basis that the dana given would produce karmic merit. This however, limits Buddhism's development, as when the monastery population becomes too large, as it did in Chinese history, the society can't cope and the result was quite instructive. Many Chinese monasteries in the 12th Century became very wealthy and owed much of the productive land around them. An increasing number of people chose to join the holy life, not necessarily for the dharma. The result was an increasing burden on society and reduced tax revenue for the ruling elites, who finally reacted with Buddhist pogrom that destroyed thousands of temples.
  • sndymornsndymorn Veteran
    Take one cooperative monk.
    Remove offal and save for sausage.
    Carve up your steaks , filets and assorted bits.
    Cook and season to taste
    Find the next most enlightened and repeat.
  • ThailandTomThailandTom Veteran
    It is obvious that the life of a monk is not suitable for every person alive. Buddhism itself is not suitable for everybody, it boils down to mental disposition.
    Buddha gave teachings on how to live life through the dharma, he gave advice to some people who would become monks and he gave advice to people who would live a lay life.

    If everybody became a monk yes the the human race would probably grind to a halt sooner or later, or at least there would be many new hurdles to overcome, but it won't ever happen...
  • shanyinshanyin Novice Yogin Sault Ontario Veteran
    Then there's the idea of reforming a religion. Reforming it - or just allowing people to grow carrots or w/e you want to call it would probably be favoured by the Buddha.
  • ThailandTomThailandTom Veteran
    Like I said, new hurdles and reform would have to be taken into account IF this would happen, (which it won't) People monks would have to have sex with nuns to create new life, this could be done without attachment, but obviously problems would occur somewhere. It is pretty pointless talking about this topic into any great detail because it will never be a reality. Some people have a mental disposition okay for being a monk, some for living a lay life as a buddhist, some have a mental disposition that remains with other religions and some with no reliong at all.
  • SherabDorjeSherabDorje
    It is pretty pointless talking about this topic into any great detail because it will never be a reality.
  • VajraheartVajraheart Veteran
    Take one cooperative monk.
    Remove offal and save for sausage.
    Carve up your steaks , filets and assorted bits.
    Cook and season to taste
    Find the next most enlightened and repeat.
    LOL! Whao! Ok now... not recommended, unless ye be impersonal universal process... eh? Of course no one is.. everyone is.
  • EpicurusEpicurus
    I think people are sometimes too quick to ridicule questions on this board. If the epitome of Buddhist life and the 8th fold path couldn't realistically be put into practice by everyone in the world...then it partially proves that there is something lacking in the Buddhist lifestyle. The search for a life of wholeness can't dismiss the very realistic issue of money and financial security.

    Why aren't monks supposed to get normal jobs? What is that saying about the validity of the buddhist lifestyle in the real world?

    I think it's a very important question. Maybe some people wouldn't mind being monks themselves if it made more pragmatic sense to actually be one.
  • VajraheartVajraheart Veteran
    The thing is,, is that the Buddha didn't only teach a monk vinaya. Plus there are many other avenues for those that have the ability to understand mahayana, vajrayana, dzogchen... Fuck being a monk, if you don't have the capacity to do so... that doesn't mean you can't be a Buddha in this lifetime either...
  • EpicurusEpicurus
    For me personally, it's more about spirituality (or whatever you call it) having a very role in everything in my life....and seeing it often so disassociated from the buddhist spiritual path. There should be buddhist career counseling for example. I'm not even joking. It tackles, and addresses most other areas of human life, why not financial independence?

    In fact, I'm personally experiencing right now, all the difficulties associated with job choices...and it actually feels it is in the way of my spiritual growth. Relationships aside, one's occupation (and let's not forget how our relationships and the rest of our lives is so dependent on our career choices) is perhaps the most important area of our lives. It's the most important element of our life happiness, in a sense. And buddhism is all about being happy.
  • compassionate_warriorcompassionate_warrior Veteran
    edited February 2011
    I think people are sometimes too quick to ridicule questions on this board.
    This is a tendency I've noticed since I joined. If people think an OP is without merit for any reason, they can choose to post on other threads. In almost every case in which someone has dismissed a topic as frivolous, the thread has turned out to be popular.
    If the epitome of Buddhist life and the 8th fold path couldn't realistically be put into practice by everyone in the world...then it partially proves that there is something lacking in the Buddhist lifestyle. The search for a life of wholeness can't dismiss the very realistic issue of money and financial security.

    Why aren't monks supposed to get normal jobs? What is that saying about the validity of the buddhist lifestyle in the real world?
    .
    Not sure what you mean by "the epitome of the BUddhist lifestyle", but certainly the basic tenets could be put into practice. Not everyone needs to become a monastic in order to have Buddhism practiced by all. Celibacy isn't for everyone, as the attrition from the monasteries that occurs when monks turn 21 (the age at which they're allowed to leave if they choose) attests.

    But Taiyaki brings up a good point; monastic life could adapt to modern circumstances, and learn to generate its own income. That activity would interfere with their study and meditation schedule, but some fort of compromise could probably be worked out. Everything is having to adapt or die, these days: Socialism, Communism (China), Capitalism, why not Monasticism?

  • DakiniDakini Veteran
    Many bodies just needs simple crops and a roof to live, and monks of the great old day live on simple crop farming.
    Continuing my response to hermitwin's question about Mongolia; there were no crops in Mongolia; Mongols don't do agriculture. Any crops or their products (wheat flour) would have come in from China or Russia by trade.

  • SherabDorjeSherabDorje
    Many bodies just needs simple crops and a roof to live, and monks of the great old day live on simple crop farming.
    Continuing my response to hermitwin's question about Mongolia; there were no crops in Mongolia; Mongols don't do agriculture. Any crops or their products (wheat flour) would have come in from China or Russia by trade.
    Maybe it's time for some well-thought-out change in Mongolia then. I myself am very much in support of maintaining the traditional herding and nomadic lifestyle, but maybe there needs to be some land allocated for agriculture as well. Or maybe at least monks need to start growing at least some if not all of their own food.

  • DakiniDakini Veteran
    edited February 2011
    That would be a good idea. The thing is, Mongols are herders since time immemorial, so they don't like agriculture. They tend to import Chinese to do that. (It's a deep cultural bias.) But it's certainly do-able. Mongols are also expert leather-workers and silversmiths, whose superior skill even HHDL acknowledges. They have plenty of beautiful and high-quality crafts they could trade for whatever they need, so the monks could take up craftwork possibly, according to their own talents.
Sign In or Register to comment.