Thai monks rebuked over 'ostentatious' jet ride

[Unkomoncents]

It seems that posters can't ask any reasonable questions about Thai Buddhism or even state their perception of it for fear of censorship.

Do these posters need to ask your "reasonable" questions?

[KravMaga]

I have two comments. Firstly if Monks are going to France then it's probably better flying than walking - if the sponsors want to pay, then so what? Secondly, I don't believe these guys are monks. The chap at the back had longer hair than me! A Monk with a mustache? Nah..... It's a spoof designed to do exactly what it is doing - throwing the Monks "under the bus" for some reason

whatever do you mean not monks.

One MONK has been positively identified by "Virood Chaipanna, director of Si Sa Ket's Office of Buddhism,"

the others may not b monks at all, but what dos that say about the one travelling in their company.

nobody has anything against a genuinely devout clergy, and even the average male on retreat is forgiven many a transgression, but these guys are clearly taking the piss

Why use slang when a good portion of the readers are NOT from your country where only that slang is known?

So you know which country I'm from? Am I Australian, American, British, South African, Swedish, Israeli? How do you know this? You have no idea which country I'm from do you? As a matter of interest, (as you must know the answer as you made the comment) where are the majority of readers from then?

[wolf5370]

I have two comments. Firstly if Monks are going to France then it's probably better flying than walking - if the sponsors want to pay, then so what? Secondly, I don't believe these guys are monks. The chap at the back had longer hair than me! A Monk with a mustache? Nah..... It's a spoof designed to do exactly what it is doing - throwing the Monks "under the bus" for some reason

The flight in question was from Bangkok to Sisaket in the North, a route covered by coaches adequately. Obviously to France is another thing (not the flight mentioned - merely where the media were told the monk now was), but even so private jet would still be grossly ostentatious.

Nothing new here. The Pope has a Maybach and his private airplane partition would make a business-class passenger blush. The clergy were the next set of historical swindlers after kings (See Guns, Germs and Steel). But Thai Buddhism is so holy that nothing but the holiness can touch such holiness.

The Pope is Catholic, Catholics have long displayed wealth and refinement (Puritanism meanwhile supports the opposite). Theravada Buddhism, on the other hand, is actively defined around a set of precepts (5 for laymen - 272 for Monks) many of the Monks precepts relate to not owning things other than discarded rags and offered food, to not attempt to beautify oneself or show off (which is why they shave their heads and make up is banned), to eat just enough to sustain life (2/3rds full), etc. Owning flashy luggage, mobile phones, computers (it is OK to use computers, but they should be owned by the temple not the individual), designer/fashion sun glasses etc. It is direct violation - it would be like the Pope having a live-in girlfriend - would nothing be said if that was discovered?

So how are Thailand's monks different than the pope?

The Pope is one man for a start - the head of the world's wealthiest most opulent church, the world's biggest denomination of the world's biggest religion - a church that does not abhor wealth or flashy shows (just walk into any Catholic cathedral) - the canon of the church is not against wealth, not against possessions, not against taking private jets (the Vatican owns a fleet!) The Pope is also the de facto King of the richest country (per head of capita) in the world.

Whereas, the Theravada monks are disallowed by precepts they swear to Buddha, Sangha and Dharma to uphold whilst a monk.

This is apples and hotdogs (pears were too close). A better comparison might be a Catholic monastic order such as Monks of St. Augustine (Ordo Sancti Augustini) which denies monks the right to personal possessions.

[Unkomoncents]

The Pope is Catholic, Catholics have long displayed wealth and refinement (Puritanism meanwhile supports the opposite). Theravada Buddhism, on the other hand, is actively defined around a set of precepts (5 for laymen - 272 for Monks) many of the Monks precepts relate to not owning things other than discarded rags and offered food, to not attempt to beautify oneself or show off (which is why they shave their heads and make up is banned), to eat just enough to sustain life (2/3rds full), etc. Owning flashy luggage, mobile phones, computers (it is OK to use computers, but they should be owned by the temple not the individual), designer/fashion sun glasses etc. It is direct violation - it would be like the Pope having a live-in girlfriend - would nothing be said if that was discovered?

Nothing new here. The Pope has a Maybach and his private airplane partition would make a business-class passenger blush. The clergy were the next set of historical swindlers after kings (See Guns, Germs and Steel). But Thai Buddhism is so holy that nothing but the holiness can touch such holiness.

So how are Thailand's monks different than the pope?

The Pope is one man for a start - the head of the world's wealthiest most opulent church, the world's biggest denomination of the world's biggest religion - a church that does not abhor wealth or flashy shows (just walk into any Catholic cathedral) - the canon of the church is not against wealth, not against possessions, not against taking private jets (the Vatican owns a fleet!) The Pope is also the de facto King of the richest country (per head of capita) in the world.

Whereas, the Theravada monks are disallowed by precepts they swear to Buddha, Sangha and Dharma to uphold whilst a monk.

This is apples and hotdogs (pears were too close). A better comparison might be a Catholic monastic order such as Monks of St. Augustine (Ordo Sancti Augustini) which denies monks the right to person possessions.

Wow. Thanks for that clarification regarding the details of one delusion as compared with another.

[canman]

Senior people of all faiths abuse the naive trust and wealth bestowed upon them by their followers, why would anyone think Buddhists should be any differant?

[spidermike007]

Nothing new here. The Pope has a Maybach and his private airplane partition would make a business-class passenger blush. The clergy were the next set of historical swindlers after kings (See Guns, Germs and Steel). But Thai Buddhism is so holy that nothing but the holiness can touch such holiness.

The Pope is Catholic, Catholics have long displayed wealth and refinement (Puritanism meanwhile supports the opposite). Theravada Buddhism, on the other hand, is actively defined around a set of precepts (5 for laymen - 272 for Monks) many of the Monks precepts relate to not owning things other than discarded rags and offered food, to not attempt to beautify oneself or show off (which is why they shave their heads and make up is banned), to eat just enough to sustain life (2/3rds full), etc. Owning flashy luggage, mobile phones, computers (it is OK to use computers, but they should be owned by the temple not the individual), designer/fashion sun glasses etc. It is direct violation - it would be like the Pope having a live-in girlfriend - would nothing be said if that was discovered?

So how are Thailand's monks different than the pope?

Whoops........there goes another rubber tree plant! Yadayada. That's how

The Pope is the figurehead of the entire religion of the Catholics. How can you ask how is the Pope different than a simple monk? is that not a bit like asking how is the Pope different than a local priest? Of course, one would hope the monks would display austerity, and be content with the bliss attained by spending hours in deep meditation and prayer. Perhaps that is too much to ask, in this day and age? Not sure. But Luang Pu Nenkham Chattigo, 34, from Wat Pa Khantitham did display a level of callousness one would not expect from a monk, and I can see why there is surprise out there. One would think that if they did accept a favor like this, they would not want it posted on youtube?

[Tywais]

where are the majority of readers from then?

Based on the 2011 Thaivisa survey - the UK.

[newermonkey]

FYI... Buddhism officially is not classed as a religion it is an education system and in fact its possible to be a christian Buddhist, but not an Islamic Buddhist because Islam forbids it.

According to the Webster's Dictionary, the definition of religion is as follows, "An organized system of beliefs, rites, and celebrations centered on a supernatural being power; belief pursued with devotion." Buddhism is not a religion because: First, the Buddha is not a 'supernatural being power'. The Buddha is simply a person who has reached Complete Understanding of the reality of life and the universe. Life refers to ourselves, and universe refers to our living environment. The Buddha taught that all beings possess the same ability within to reach Complete Understanding of themselves and their environment, and free themselves from all sufferings to attain utmost happiness. All beings can become Buddhas, and all beings and the Buddha are equal by nature. The Buddha is not a God, but a teacher, who teaches us the way to restore Wisdom and Understanding by conquering the greed, hatred, and ignorance which blind us at the present moment. The word 'Buddha' is a Sanskrit word, when translated it means, "Wisdom, Awareness/Understanding". We call the founder of Buddhism Shakyamuni 'Buddha' because He has attained Complete Understanding and Wisdom of life and the universe. Buddhism is His education to us, it is His teaching which shines the way to Buddhahood.

[wilcopops]

I don't see the point of commentinhg on the religion itself, when this is a news item about a person and some othe people who run the religion in Thailand.f

[canopus1969]

As the Office of National Buddhism has stated, they were acting "inappropriately, not composed and not adhering to Buddha's teachings of simplicity and self-restraint".

Unfortunatley this goes on on every day and every time I fly (several times a month) there are always monks on the flight - my question is why. I understand to walk would take too long but why not the bus and save money i.e. show restraint.

[pedro01]

"Yesterday I went to the temple but he was not there. They said he is in France," Virood said.

Probably gone to buy some more handbags.

[lostmebike]

It seems that posters can't ask any reasonable questions about Thai Buddhism or even state their perception of it for fear of censorship.

Do these posters need to ask your "reasonable" questions?

The idea of freedom of speech is one can say anything within reason, right?

Posters don't have to do anything but if they wish to speak on a subject, they can, that's the beauty of it!

You get it?

[A Member]

I dont think any body could say anything bad about Buddhism in its self . It is well known to be the only teaching that can be proven to do what it say on the tin, I think even Einstein commented on that . The trouble is the culture itself in Thailand is changing Buddhism is becoming like all other religions . When walking into many temples one has to pass several "checkpoints collecting donations with all sorts of money spinning ideas to generate more cash. monks are obviously now expecting to be treated with the respect and better treatment for their position in the brotherhood.. The mods issued a warning about dont mention royalty or religion . neither are bad in principle but we can see the abuse of power by some involved in both;. the Thai general public I believe have just given up and accepted this is the Thai way and there is nothing anyone can do about it.... from my time in Thailand I think I have seen it worsen over the years , or maybe it has just become more noticeable or even less hidden.

I think you have raised a good point about acceptance of abuses as the just Thai way and over the years I have seen Buddhist law and culture mirror what happens in society.

It's not unusual to see or read reports of a monk caught doing something wrong being immediately disrobed by the abbot of the nearest temple but those who go upmarket into accepting lavish gifts, considerations and other " major " no, no's etc.only get their knuckles wrapped especially if their devotees include politicians and other powerful people.

[kamahele]

Putting on a robe, or collar or whatever denotes a particular religious leader or monk, does not make one a good person. We have certainly seen this with all forms of Christian sects, Jewish, Muslim etc. Buddhists are obviously just as human and flawed as the rest. Found the video quite funny. Almost as funny as that American mega church leader about 20 years ago who was arrested and I think videotaped receiving oral sex from a prostitute.

[Unkomoncents]

It seems that posters can't ask any reasonable questions about Thai Buddhism or even state their perception of it for fear of censorship.

Do these posters need to ask your "reasonable" questions?

The idea of freedom of speech is one can say anything within reason, right?

Posters don't have to do anything but if they wish to speak on a subject, they can, that's the beauty of it!

You get it?

So said the snake.

[pisico]

I have two comments. Firstly if Monks are going to France then it's probably better flying than walking - if the sponsors want to pay, then so what? Secondly, I don't believe these guys are monks. The chap at the back had longer hair than me! A Monk with a mustache? Nah..... It's a spoof designed to do exactly what it is doing - throwing the Monks "under the bus" for some reason

The flight in question was from Bangkok to Sisaket in the North, a route covered by coaches adequately. Obviously to France is another thing (not the flight mentioned - merely where the media were told the monk now was), but even so private jet would still be grossly ostentatious.

Nothing new here. The Pope has a Maybach and his private airplane partition would make a business-class passenger blush. The clergy were the next set of historical swindlers after kings (See Guns, Germs and Steel). But Thai Buddhism is so holy that nothing but the holiness can touch such holiness.

The Pope is Catholic, Catholics have long displayed wealth and refinement (Puritanism meanwhile supports the opposite). Theravada Buddhism, on the other hand, is actively defined around a set of precepts (5 for laymen - 272 for Monks) many of the Monks precepts relate to not owning things other than discarded rags and offered food, to not attempt to beautify oneself or show off (which is why they shave their heads and make up is banned), to eat just enough to sustain life (2/3rds full), etc. Owning flashy luggage, mobile phones, computers (it is OK to use computers, but they should be owned by the temple not the individual), designer/fashion sun glasses etc. It is direct violation - it would be like the Pope having a live-in girlfriend - would nothing be said if that was discovered?

So how are Thailand's monks different than the clergy? The Pope (I am commanded by Microsoft to comply with their correction of my improper use of capital letters [or lack thereof])?

You mean Abbots?

[wolf5370]

buddhism isnt a religeon its a set of teachings buddha was a real person not a daity, (GOD),for whom no matter what belief you follow no-one has ever seen,and never will,,,,this topic just casts a bad light on the real genuine monks ,,male and female,,,as to the catholic church,,they like to preach to the very poor telling them theyl burn in hell etc,,all the while living like kings ,,,,,,,,hypocrasy at its very best ,,,,dont do as i do,,do as i say,,,and they still say condoms are evil,,,,grow up ,,like the ptp they need there power,,,,

A religion doesn't need to have a deity - it only needs to have a belief. There are no female Theravada monks (only women monks can ordain women - and there aren't any any more - once there were - this is why there are only nuns).

Condoms comes from the question of the soul - at what point is a foetus an individual life in its own right (to a Christian this is when it has obtained a soul - from the Guf). If this is at insemination, then its is not (religious) murder to use condoms, but abortion (also not accepted by the Catholic church) would be. If it is at birth (as some Christian denominations believe) then either is fine. Condoms are accepted by most denominations, but not the Catholic church. The thinking of this (Vatican II - I think???) is that it is up to God to decide if life should come from coupling, and to deny God is a sin (basically). It is well thought out and against their basic canons, it is not an arbitrary rule - many times there have been calls to change it, but the church can not just change what has been instilled as God's word because of peer pressure.

Almost all religions have a risk and reward (carrot and stick) approach - even Buddhism. Look at the cycle of reincarnation (the wheel of life) and see where "sinners" and those that are good end up.

[amrishtony]

It Happens only in Thailand ;-)

[Card]

I wonder if they had the mixed grill for lunch, washed down with a nice Bordeaux?

[Unkomoncents]

The flight in question was from Bangkok to Sisaket in the North, a route covered by coaches adequately. Obviously to France is another thing (not the flight mentioned - merely where the media were told the monk now was), but even so private jet would still be grossly ostentatious.

Nothing new here. The Pope has a Maybach and his private airplane partition would make a business-class passenger blush. The clergy were the next set of historical swindlers after kings (See Guns, Germs and Steel). But Thai Buddhism is so holy that nothing but the holiness can touch such holiness.

The Pope is Catholic, Catholics have long displayed wealth and refinement (Puritanism meanwhile supports the opposite). Theravada Buddhism, on the other hand, is actively defined around a set of precepts (5 for laymen - 272 for Monks) many of the Monks precepts relate to not owning things other than discarded rags and offered food, to not attempt to beautify oneself or show off (which is why they shave their heads and make up is banned), to eat just enough to sustain life (2/3rds full), etc. Owning flashy luggage, mobile phones, computers (it is OK to use computers, but they should be owned by the temple not the individual), designer/fashion sun glasses etc. It is direct violation - it would be like the Pope having a live-in girlfriend - would nothing be said if that was discovered?

So how are Thailand's monks different than the clergy? The Pope (I am commanded by Microsoft to comply with their correction of my improper use of capital letters [or lack thereof])?

You mean Abbots?

Imams, Rabbis, Popes, Pastors, Cardinals, Monks, Nuns, Jim Jones, whatever. The cloth is woven from the same threads.

[giggles]

i do see quite a few at pantip plaza buying snide software games and various computer parts and printers

.shouldnt they be in the local temple doing the religious texts ?

[lemonjelly]

They've got that dodgy Thai mafia look about them…… and the gold tinted sunglasses….. it makes a fool of their temple, shame on them…. will they be disrobed ?

[winstonc]

More proof that the monks abuse their status within the guidance of the religion. Whether they organised the jet or someone did is not the question they should have refused.

not all monks,,get it right,,theres always e few bad apples in every barrell unfortunatly sir,,,,

[Gsxrnz]

The global question is really this. Does religion corrupt individuals, or do individuals corrupt religion?. In every incidence of alleged religious corruption (regardless of the faith, sect, or dogma), I think it's important to ask oneself this question.

In this thread, are the Monks in question "corrupt" for the behaviour they have demonstrated, or is the religion itself corrupt for allowing these things to occur, or allowing its followers to believe that these behaviours are acceptable?

[camerata]

It seems that posters can't ask any reasonable questions about Thai Buddhism or even state their perception of it for fear of censorship.

I don't see why not. In fact we have a Buddhism Forum where members can ask reasonable questions about Buddhism. The problem with perceptions is that they can be totally wrong and defamatory. It's worth noting that - whether we like it or not - "insulting religion" is against the law in Thailand.

[giggles]

Representative costs of a similar-sized jet in commercial passenger service:
Direct operating costs:
Fuel @ $3. = $975 (burn around 325/hr, incl. into-plane and taxes)
Cockpit crew = $250
Maintenance = $575 (est. power by the hour for engines, wheels/tires/brakes plus est. airframe parts & direct labor)
That's $1,800 without insurance or aircraft ownership costs.

Catering, ground handling and landing fees easily add another $600 to $1000 per flight -- cost per hour depends on stage length.

basic cost to buy say 25 million $ for a 2007 model to 48 million $ for a 20011 model

[lostmebike]

It seems that posters can't ask any reasonable questions about Thai Buddhism or even state their perception of it for fear of censorship.

Do these posters need to ask your "reasonable" questions?

The idea of freedom of speech is one can say anything within reason, right?

Posters don't have to do anything but if they wish to speak on a subject, they can, that's the beauty of it!

You get it?

So said the snake.

Incorrect again

Not Snake, Trousersnake!

You just don't get it do ya

[hyperdimension]

I knew that beggars can make a lot of money, but I never knew it was to this extent!

[stickylies]

buddhism isnt a religeon its a set of teachings buddha was a real person not a daity, (GOD),for whom no matter what belief you follow no-one has ever seen,and never will

i recommend u read "Chapter Fourteen: There Is No 'Eastern' Solution" in the more than essential God is Not great book by C Hitchens.

[lostmebike]

It seems that posters can't ask any reasonable questions about Thai Buddhism or even state their perception of it for fear of censorship.

I don't see why not. In fact we have a Buddhism Forum where members can ask reasonable questions about Buddhism. The problem with perceptions is that they can be totally wrong and defamatory. It's worth noting that - whether we like it or not - "insulting religion" is against the law in Thailand.

Yes sir Mr Moderator sir.

Never said anything about insulting religion, never crossed my mind, even for a moment. Am aware of the law and wouldn't be silly enough to do so either.