Ajahn Brahm for sale?

[Dan74]

Greetings,

Those Mahayanists. Not dour.

... with their institutionalized precedent of Vinaya violations in the name of skilful means and bodhisattva ideals?

Doesn't work for me, but best of luck to them.

Metta,
Retro.

Indeed these are problematic. Absolutes on the other hand, are much more comforting.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Indeed these are problematic. Absolutes on the other hand, are much more comforting.

Not absolutes - just the Dhammavinaya laid down by The Teacher.



Metta,
Retro.

[Dan74]

Greetings,

Indeed these are problematic. Absolutes on the other hand, are much more comforting.

Not absolutes - just the Dhammavinaya laid down by The Teacher.



Metta,
Retro.

Dhammavinaya or a take on Dhammavinaya?

It seems these discussions return to the same point - are we conflating the teachings with an interpretation of the teachings? And is there one correct interpretation which is therefore equivalent to the teachings themselves?

My motivation will likely be taken as being insecure or defensive. Samasara, eh? We do the same rounds over and over again...

[imagemarie]

Hi

Sense of humour apart (!), I just find it a bit tacky that a Bhikkhu should slot so seemlessly into the consumerist paradigm that everything has a price and may be bought.. Returning to the marketplace, and skilful means justify the ends, perhaps

But it isn't going against the stream is it?

[pilgrim]

Can one of the dour-faces please point out exactly which Vinaya rule is being transgressed?

[santa100]

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:
The baseless accusations of dour-faced Buddhists disapproving of the Venerable Brahmavamso's silliness just shows that some are totally ignorant of the Vinaya and the Buddhist tradition.

If the nuns are serious about following the Bhikkhuni Vinaya, they should reject any funds received by inappropriate methods. If they want to live the holy life in full let them try to raise their own funds in ways that are appropriate for monastics — which basically means waiting for an offer of support to be made (although if one has no dwelling place it is allowable to drop a hint). Such limitations do not apply to lay supporters or devotees — they can appeal for funds, or organise food-fairs, etc., to raise funds even for a “multi-million dollar project.”

NP20: Should any bhikkhu engage in various types of trade, it (the article obtained) is to be forfeited and confessed.

Right on bhante!

[Mr Man]

Can one of the dour-faces please point out exactly which Vinaya rule is being transgressed?

Why is that relevant and why the "dour-faces" comment?

[tiltbillings]

Greetings,

Those Mahayanists. Not dour.

... with their institutionalized precedent of Vinaya violations in the name of skilful means and bodhisattva ideals?

Doesn't work for me, but best of luck to them.

Metta,
Retro.

Vinaya violation? It certainly has been suggested, but I have not seen any evidence that one needs to take the "Selling of Ajahn Brahm" literally or that a Vinaya violation is actually in the making. I do see, however, a lot of disappointment that Ajahn B is not acting in ways that people want him to act.

[tiltbillings]

Can one of the dour-faces please point out exactly which Vinaya rule is being transgressed?

Why is that relevant and why the "dour-faces" comment?

The Vinaya business is relevant because it is claimed that Ven B's tacky way of trying to raise money for the bhikkhunis is a violation of the Vinaya. Ven B may very well be guilty of bad taste, as it were, but I rather doubt that someone of Ven B's standing and knowledge would so blatantly violate the Vinaya. Vinaya violation does, however, serve as a potent way of condemning what the dour see as unseemly behaviour of a monk. As for the dour-faced comments, that goes to those who see no humor in what Ven B is doing. It is tacky, but it is also funny. But we cannot have funny, no laughter, no play. I have not been a fan of Ven Brahm, but this stunt has raised my estimation of him up, if just in contrast to the puritanical who are simply too rigid to see anything other than their expectations and are upset that their expectation are not being met by some one.


The Path of Discrimination (Patisambhidamagga by Sariputta) p. 372, para XXI 17. "With much laughter, blitheness, content and gladness he realizes the ultimate meaning, nibbana, thus it is laughing understanding."

[tiltbillings]

Hi

Sense of humour apart (!), I just find it a bit tacky that a Bhikkhu should slot so seemlessly into the consumerist paradigm that everything has a price and may be bought.. Returning to the marketplace, and skilful means justify the ends, perhaps

But it isn't going against the stream is it?

Maybe Ajahn Brahm is rather neatly mocking the "consumerist paradigm," and in the process getting some good Dhamma work accomplished.

[pilgrim]

[b][u]NP20: Should any bhikkhu engage in various types of trade, it (the article obtained) is to be forfeited and confessed.

Do you really see a trade? or is it a dana and an offer to lead a retreat?
It is obvious that neither the Nunnery nor the funds donated belongs to Ajahn Brahm. Now the Nunnery gets funds for more kutis and other facilities allowing more people to practise. And some organisation gets Ajahn to lead a week-long retreat. There is goodwill and benefits all round. And people are complaining because they believe they are able to squeeze out a transgression from their interpretation of the rules. People need to lighten up. Suffering is not mandatory.

[LonesomeYogurt]

I would disapprove if I thought this was going to lead in any way to a rash of Bhikkhu auctions, but Ajahn Brahm is sufficiently unique in his methods that I can't really see this becoming a larger issue.

From what I understand of Vinaya, the lottery structure renders this appropriate, if a little close to the edge; if it were a direct payment for teaching, that would be considered commerce, but having a donation enter one into a raffle, I believe, puts enough space between the teaching and the donation. Just my opinion.

[Mr Man]

The Vinaya business is relevant because it is claimed that Ven B's tacky way of trying to raise money for the bhikkhunis is a violation of the Vinaya.

I hadn't seen that it was being claimed that Ven B was in violation of the vinaya and the vinaya business may be relevant to some but in my opinion what is appropriate goes beyond formulized vinaya.

As for the dour-faced comments, that goes to those who see no humor in what Ven B is doing.[/quote]Well I really can't see how it is funny. I think it's a case of the "kings new cloths".

I am not sure why some people have a problem with other people having a problem with this auction.

[Cittasanto]

Can one of the dour-faces please point out exactly which Vinaya rule is being transgressed?

none so far, but whether a full offence would be commited or the rule tarnished, that is another matter

As previously quoted there are three possible rules which could be broken as far as I can see

nothing obscure, and can be found easily.

"Now I do say that thatch may be sought for by one needing thatch, wood may be sought for by one needing wood, a cart may be sought for by one needing a cart, a workman may be sought for by one needing a workman, but by no means do I say that money may be consented to or sought for in any way at all."

18. Should any bhikkhu accept gold and silver, or have it accepted, or consent to its being deposited (near him), it is to be forfeited and confessed.

19. Should any bhikkhu engage in various types of monetary exchange, it (the income) is to be forfeited and confessed.

20. Should any bhikkhu engage in various types of trade, it (the article obtained) is to be forfeited and confessed.

he is trading himself for money to build.

although with a look at DN 2 you will find trading humans as wrong livelihood for mendicants, as it is for lay people.
[edit] although it should be mentioned that the example of seeking what materials is needed in SN42.10 above is seen in the second Parajika also, but not sure if it is also found as a rule itself.

[Cittasanto]

The Vinaya business is relevant because it is claimed that Ven B's tacky way of trying to raise money for the bhikkhunis is a violation of the Vinaya.

I hadn't seen that it was being claimed that Ven B was in violation of the vinaya and the vinaya business may be relevant to some but in my opinion what is appropriate goes beyond formulized vinaya.

As for the dour-faced comments, that goes to those who see no humor in what Ven B is doing.

Well I really can't see how it is funny. I think it's a case of the "kings new cloths".

I am not sure why some people have a problem with other people having a problem with this auction.[/quote]
I referenced the above re-quoted vinaya rules as part of the reason for my own opinion on this. but it is trying to be made into something pasted on everyone who disagrees with this. unsupprising

whether the name calling is ment in jest or not it is nothing but mockery, and certainly uncalled for.

[David N. Snyder]

which basically means waiting for an offer of support to be made (although if one has no dwelling place it is allowable to drop a hint).

Hi Bhante,

Since this form of fundraising is for the Dhammasara Nuns' Monastery building fund, couldn't this be considered a hint (and therefore okay by the Vinaya)? It is after all, for a building fund and the bhikkhunis are in need of such a dwelling place.

[marc108]

'tarnished' is just another way of saying he has an opinion which you dont agree with. seems clear that no Vinaya rule has really been broken here, just that his interpretations differs from some of our own.

The buildings he is trying to get money for will likely be a place for Bhikkhinis to practice for hundreds, if not THOUSANDS of years to come. better what, to let the Bhikkhuni order whither away and let them have no where to practice in order to adhere to some strict interpretation of a rule? wait around and HOPE someone magically donates all the money? it's silly to even suggest such a thing. If Ajahn Brahm, with all his power and influence, has to beg and do fund raising to get money i'm sure he has exhausted ALL other options.

Listen to this video... he's literally begging and refusing funds for his own monastery. He says there are lists of women waiting to ordain... Could you imagine? Being ready to make that level of commitment and you cant because there's nowhere to stay? it's unthinkable.

[Mr Man]

seems clear that no Vinaya rule has really been broken here

Is this the only criteria you use to determine what is appropriate?

[marc108]

seems clear that no Vinaya rule has really been broken here

Is this the only criteria you use to determine what is appropriate?

Of course not, but that seems to be a primary objection here and generally the standard to which monks are held and hold themselves.

[Cittasanto]

Hi Marc
I am afraid the act stands by itself, motivation is not a mitigating factor. but you should read what I put instead of plucking one word out of context, or taking that as the whole of an argument against.

The Bhikkhunis have a roof over their head and greater comfort then they should expect in the life they have chosen, would extra space for lodgings now really be a multimillion dollar project? or is the project bigger than needed now? two new residences, new monastery, new carpark....
They already have land and a roof over their heads. new everything is not necessarily the best option.