I just read this really interesting article and it really got me thinking;

http://members.shaw.ca/mioko/DharmaTalkHumanBeings.htm

There has been a lot of concerns raised about the behaviour of monks here in Thailand but are these concerns justified. The article above makes the point that going to a temple and seeing monks doing things wrong and being shocked about it is a bit like going to a hospital and being shocked that people are sick. Do we expect that people who put on the robes should automatically behave well or is this expecting too much? I am not saying that we shouldn't be against bad behaviour but that we shouldn't be so shocked by it. The vinya is already in place to deal with misbehaving monks.

I think that comparing a temple to a hospital is a really appropriate analogy. It should be seen as a place where we go to get better with some people needing to stay longer than others. Like hospitals some people are there because they want to get better and some have been pressured to go there and may react by resisting and not trying to improve. There may also be some 'social admissions' who have nowhere else to go. It may also be possible for some people to be treated as an 'out-patient'.

I would be interested to hear what you lot think about this, if anything?

Edited July 7, 200718 yr by garro

There has been a lot of concerns raised about the behaviour of monks here in Thailand but are these concerns justified. The article above makes the point that going to a temple and seeing monks doing things wrong and being shocked about it is a bit like going to a hospital and being shocked that people are sick. Do we expect that people who put on the robes should automatically behave well or is this expecting too much? I am not saying that we shouldn't be against bad behaviour but that we shouldn't be so shocked by it. The vinya is already in place to deal with misbehaving monks.

I think that comparing a temple to a hospital is a really appropriate analogy. It should be seen as a place where we go to get better with some people needing to stay longer than others. Like hospitals some people are there because they want to get better and some have been pressured to go there and may react by resisting and not trying to improve. There may also be some 'social admissions' who have nowhere else to go. It may also be possible for some people to be treated as an 'out-patient'.

I would be interested to hear what you lot think about this, if anything?

I seem to have read a very different article from what you've read. By the whole tone of the article it seems to me to be talking about Buddhism the way we experience and relate to it in the West and about lay practitioners rather than monastics.

When you read it that way hospital analogy makes more sense, otherwise I'd say that "going to a temple and seeing monks doing things wrong and being shocked about it is a bit like going to a hospital and being shocked that the doctors and nurses are sick".

The whole point is nobody's perfect and we're all going on our way along the path hopefully as best we can, this is true for both lay or monastic practitioners (by practitioners I mean those genuinely interested in following the path).

However monastics, as full time Buddhist professionals, have an external code of conduct that they must follow independant of their own personal defilements and imperfections. The 227 precepts is designed as a support a monk to develop himself on the path mentioned above, and they aren't that hard to keep (except for the little rules).

So no, the fact that nobody is perfect is not an excuse for monastics to flout their training rules, just as a doctor or nurse cannot flout medical ethics or procedures because they may be having a bad day, if they really have to do that it would be better if they weren't in robes at all.

There has been a lot of concerns raised about the behaviour of monks here in Thailand but are these concerns justified. The article above makes the point that going to a temple and seeing monks doing things wrong and being shocked about it is a bit like going to a hospital and being shocked that people are sick. Do we expect that people who put on the robes should automatically behave well or is this expecting too much? I am not saying that we shouldn't be against bad behaviour but that we shouldn't be so shocked by it. The vinya is already in place to deal with misbehaving monks.

I think that comparing a temple to a hospital is a really appropriate analogy. It should be seen as a place where we go to get better with some people needing to stay longer than others. Like hospitals some people are there because they want to get better and some have been pressured to go there and may react by resisting and not trying to improve. There may also be some 'social admissions' who have nowhere else to go. It may also be possible for some people to be treated as an 'out-patient'.

I would be interested to hear what you lot think about this, if anything?

I seem to have read a very different article from what you've read. By the whole tone of the article it seems to me to be talking about Buddhism the way we experience and relate to it in the West and about lay practitioners rather than monastics.

When you read it that way hospital analogy makes more sense, otherwise I'd say that "going to a temple and seeing monks doing things wrong and being shocked about it is a bit like going to a hospital and being shocked that the doctors and nurses are sick".

The whole point is nobody's perfect and we're all going on our way along the path hopefully as best we can, this is true for both lay or monastic practitioners (by practitioners I mean those genuinely interested in following the path).

However monastics, as full time Buddhist professionals, have an external code of conduct that they must follow independant of their own personal defilements and imperfections. The 227 precepts is designed as a support a monk to develop himself on the path mentioned above, and they aren't that hard to keep (except for the little rules).

So no, the fact that nobody is perfect is not an excuse for monastics to flout their training rules, just as a doctor or nurse cannot flout medical ethics or procedures because they may be having a bad day, if they really have to do that it would be better if they weren't in robes at all.

Hi Brucenkhamen, I agree the article was aimed at lay practitioners (as I said it got me thinking) and that the vinaya is important. I am not so sure, however, that monks can be compared to doctors and nurses. These professionals undergo years of training before being unleashed on the public. I see entering the monkhood as entering training. Or do you think that only people already well advanced on the path should be considered for the monkhood?

When I first came to Thailand I would see monks with cigarettes and mobile phones, andwonder what it was all about. Now it's the Jatukam Ramathep amulet thing, and it would be easy to wonder what it's all about.

But then I remember that this has absolutely nothing to do with me. It's none of my business. It only affects my life if I let it. And until I am completely aware of what I am and what I am doing at all times, it seems unfair to be picking fault with others.

At least, that's what I try to do. But then, I'm still learning too.

Hi Brucenkhamen, I agree the article was aimed at lay practitioners (as I said it got me thinking) and that the vinaya is important. I am not so sure, however, that monks can be compared to doctors and nurses. These professionals undergo years of training before being unleashed on the public. I see entering the monkhood as entering training. Or do you think that only people already well advanced on the path should be considered for the monkhood?

A doctor or nurse isn't ready to practice on live patients straight away any more than a monk is ready to teach, monks aren't considered 'teachers' until they've been in robes 10 years. However if someone decides they want to be a doctor or nurse and enters training and immediately shows disregard for ethics and procedures and the rules around what they can and cannot do they won't last long will they?

Ok... here we go.

I have spent years avoiding replying to topics like this, mainly because I like Buddhism and all that it stands for. I admire the philosophy and the people that truly practice it.

But let me tell you about Chang-man.

One of Papa's oldest friends used to come calling at the house, he would always open the fridge door and point at beer, I would always nod an acknowledgement ..... thus Chang-man was born.

Three years ago my wife's brother did the 15 day skive at the local Wat (be honest, it's just like enforced military service) Chang-man was ordained on the same day, but he didn't come out, he's still there.

I asked my wife why he had stayed and she informed me that he was trying to make merit for his previous failings, drinking, smoking, gambling, sleeping around etc.

Guess what? ..... he still drinks, he still smokes, he still gambles, but now he is in orange robes. Does he still sleep around?..... A. No, that part of his anatomy stopped functioning around three years ago, and that was probably his main reason for having his head shaved, while he had a flock of mia noi's to keep him in beer and cigarettes he didn't need the temple... now he does and he uses it to his best advantage.

I still see him, frequently stood next to half a dozen similarly clad Chang-men either road-side accepting rice, or in the local bank making a deposit, or in the local mini-mart buying cigarettes and a 300 Baht 1-2-Call card. (is that right and fair?)

So... in answer to the original question .... in rural Thailand, yes, you are expecting too much, the saffron leeches will not move away from their comfy sofa's without a financial incentive, they control the lives of the locals, not because they can do it but because the locals seek direction from a higher authority (the fact that this higher authority is skinning them alive is sadly greyed out by the belief system)

Chang-man, Buddhist ? ..... that's what the ID card says.

Reality, free booze, free travel, free food and enough donations to make you happy for the rest of your natural.

(see Jet, told you I had a dark side )

So... in answer to the original question .... in rural Thailand, yes, you are expecting too much, the saffron leeches will not move away from their comfy sofa's without a financial incentive, they control the lives of the locals, not because they can do it but because the locals seek direction from a higher authority (the fact that this higher authority is skinning them alive is sadly greyed out by the belief system)

Chang-man, Buddhist ? ..... that's what the ID card says.

Reality, free booze, free travel, free food and enough donations to make you happy for the rest of your natural.

Yes, that's the reality of it for the majority of Thai monks, I wouldn't want to hazard a guess as to what percentage. That doesn't mean we should accept it and say it's ok, trouble is the potential is there for them to ruin it for the minority of genuine practicing monks. Thai lay people don't seem to see this the way westerners do, but then they are expecting something different from their religion.

I have no expectations on monks.

To have expectations would lead to disappointments and I would never want to saddle myself with unnecessary anxiety!

Anyway too bz being happy to worry about what monks do!

Police say fake monks from Thailand preying on Singaporeans

Posted : Sun, 08 Jul 2007 04:56:00 GMT

Author : DPA

Singapore - Bogus monks and nuns from Thailand have been collecting alms from Singaporeans and evading police by making speedy getaways, The Sunday Times reported. Numbering as many as 100, they take refuge in a four-storey hotel in the red-light district of Geyland.

Arriving on social visit passes, they don religious robes in the morning and make their rounds, the newspaper said. Many then shed their robes and emerge in civilian clothing, heading for nearby coffee shops.

perhaps there is an argument for making the robes harder to earn and identifying the one week novices as such .

I think we should expect a certain behaviour from monks. They should follow the major vinaya rules, and behave in a 'monk-like' manner.

We would expect police to behave in a certain manner - not breaking the laws they are enforcing, accepting bribes etc. The same with Doctors, we would expect them to be qualified and follow proper medical proceedures etc.

If monks cannot behave as monks, they shouldn't ordain. eg. if they wish to drink, they should remain laymen. I assume they ordain for the easy lifestyle. As long as you can refrain from sex, then they can usually get away with most of the things they were doing as laymen, and they get paid a lot more for doing a lot less.

bad monks are not monks...but people masquerading as monks

from the time they flaunted their unwillingness to keep their precepts they became non-monks

we should pity them as they will suffer two-fold for their bad karma.....cheating the people....bringing the sangha into disrespect.... causing people to lose faith....causing others of other religions to get a bad view of buddhism...and enabling christian missionaries to point out the faults of buddhism to their converts...etc....etc...

nowadays monks are falling into hel_l like the leaves falling from the trees in autumn

Ok... here we go.

I have spent years avoiding replying to topics like this, mainly because I like Buddhism and all that it stands for. I admire the philosophy and the people that truly practice it.

But let me tell you about Chang-man.

One of Papa's oldest friends used to come calling at the house, he would always open the fridge door and point at beer, I would always nod an acknowledgement ..... thus Chang-man was born.

Three years ago my wife's brother did the 15 day skive at the local Wat (be honest, it's just like enforced military service) Chang-man was ordained on the same day, but he didn't come out, he's still there.

I asked my wife why he had stayed and she informed me that he was trying to make merit for his previous failings, drinking, smoking, gambling, sleeping around etc.

Guess what? ..... he still drinks, he still smokes, he still gambles, but now he is in orange robes. Does he still sleep around?..... A. No, that part of his anatomy stopped functioning around three years ago, and that was probably his main reason for having his head shaved, while he had a flock of mia noi's to keep him in beer and cigarettes he didn't need the temple... now he does and he uses it to his best advantage.

I still see him, frequently stood next to half a dozen similarly clad Chang-men either road-side accepting rice, or in the local bank making a deposit, or in the local mini-mart buying cigarettes and a 300 Baht 1-2-Call card. (is that right and fair?)

So... in answer to the original question .... in rural Thailand, yes, you are expecting too much, the saffron leeches will not move away from their comfy sofa's without a financial incentive, they control the lives of the locals, not because they can do it but because the locals seek direction from a higher authority (the fact that this higher authority is skinning them alive is sadly greyed out by the belief system)

Chang-man, Buddhist ? ..... that's what the ID card says.

Reality, free booze, free travel, free food and enough donations to make you happy for the rest of your natural.

(see Jet, told you I had a dark side )

Thaddeous it is not your black side. All I can say is have you been to Nadi about an hour outside Surin? The greed of the one monk in charge of money food gifts etc. then laundered thru his family, it is sickning. The village is so poor and in need of true guidance he has all the designated reality traits you refer to. May buda really give them guidance..

Its the abbots and the senior monks who have a responsibility for teaching the vinaya (monks rules) to the new monks. Some new monks think it is "cool" to flaunt/bend the rules but again, its comes back to the senior monks (and reflects poorly on them and the temple - and buddhism in general).

That doesn't mean we should accept it

What else can you do? It is how it is. Know it for what it is, and then see the best way of doing something about it, if that's what you want to do.

Thai lay people don't seem to see this the way westerners do, but then they are expecting something different from their religion.

Indeed.

we should pity them

Maybe we should try to show them compassion, eh?

falling into hel_l

What's with 'hel_l"? I've been seeing that a few times on TV recently.

Sorry to jump in here, but a thai monk gets given free travel!? I've seen them pay with money for trips on buses and airplanes, or do they get a travel allowance granted by the abbot?

The free booze thing... I didn't know that. Do the head monks not keep tabs on the new monks to keep them in line?

It sounds like the children are running the temple and the adults are just whistling away the hours!

I just read this really interesting article and it really got me thinking;

http://members.shaw.ca/mioko/DharmaTalkHumanBeings.htm

There has been a lot of concerns raised about the behaviour of monks here in Thailand but are these concerns justified. The article above makes the point that going to a temple and seeing monks doing things wrong and being shocked about it is a bit like going to a hospital and being shocked that people are sick. Do we expect that people who put on the robes should automatically behave well or is this expecting too much? I am not saying that we shouldn't be against bad behaviour but that we shouldn't be so shocked by it. The vinya is already in place to deal with misbehaving monks.

I think that comparing a temple to a hospital is a really appropriate analogy. It should be seen as a place where we go to get better with some people needing to stay longer than others. Like hospitals some people are there because they want to get better and some have been pressured to go there and may react by resisting and not trying to improve. There may also be some 'social admissions' who have nowhere else to go. It may also be possible for some people to be treated as an 'out-patient'.

I would be interested to hear what you lot think about this, if anything?

if you want to compare a monk to a medical doctor, then, yes, you are expecting too much.

Perhaps I should have read the article but I think yes, sometimes people can be too hard on religious figures. Monks have choosen a hard path to walk, and for some to mess up from time to time is understandable. I would say that perhaps they simple just start over and try again. Having said that, I feel that there is a big gap between a monk breaking a precept and getting drunk and a monk living high on the hog because they abuse their position. The second group needs some weight coming down on them.

Sorry to jump in here, but a thai monk gets given free travel!? I've seen them pay with money for trips on buses and airplanes, or do they get a travel allowance granted by the abbot?

The free booze thing... I didn't know that. Do the head monks not keep tabs on the new monks to keep them in line?

It sounds like the children are running the temple and the adults are just whistling away the hours!

Monks get free travel on the local buses. If they want to travel further, they need a ticket. But I believe they are given discounts. Thai Airways gives generous discounts too.

In the temples, the head monks generally do not keep tabs on the younger ones too closely. They are 'important' and often travel, accept invitations etc, so are frequently absent. Lower level senior monks look after the newbies, but generally new ones are fairly free to do what they like - as long as it is not too unusual.

I am skeptical when it comes to religion. Yes there are corrupt monks. Sort of like Thailand's version of South American evangelicals or Pakistani Immans that exploit the fears and ignorance of people. Although their dishonesty and loose ethics is quite less than the Jim Baaker's and Jimmy Swagegrt's of this world they are just as plentiful.

A true Bhuddist monk does not prosletyze nor ask for anything, but instead sets an example for others to follow. Alms, gifts or whatever are to be given of free will and from the donor's heart. The moment I see a monk asking for something material for himself. I know he is is weak of faith and corrupt. A true monk would starve before asking for food or drink and strives to do no harm. A pure monk is possessed of a genuine warmth and goodness that even a skeptic like me can feel and sense. That is what should motivate one to give to the monk. True monks are admirable for they have the inner strength to try and do what is right without imposing upon others. When there is a corrupt monk, it is not Bhuddism that has failed, but the human who wears the monk's robes. Unfortunately, as the Thai population grows, so too do the problems of the purity of its monks.