Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

Good day,

Correct me if i'm wrong. I do believe Buddhism is a religion who adapt to changes. No doubt to reach out to the lay people, especially around the world, now we can access to blogs, twitter and facebook of some great bhikkhu/teachers. But Is it a good ideal as the internet is a unlimited resource of info, wanted or unwanted(explicit ones).

What i'm trying to ask is, if you can have an facebook account, you can have lotsa followers, you can add any people, like many pages. What if it pages of models/sexy entertainers/cute girls pictures provider. Is it wrong or am i too narrow mind?

Mao wrote:Good day,

Correct me if i'm wrong. I do believe Buddhism is a religion who adapt to changes. No doubt to reach out to the lay people, especially around the world, now we can access to blogs, twitter and facebook of some great bhikkhu/teachers. But Is it a good ideal as the internet is a unlimited resource of info, wanted or unwanted(explicit ones).

What i'm trying to ask is, if you can have an facebook account, you can have lotsa followers, you can add any people, like many pages. What if it pages of models/sexy entertainers/cute girls pictures provider. Is it wrong or am i too narrow mind?

hi mao,
welcome to Dhammawheel
the images might give the monks a good idea of the hindrances they still have to deal with.
perhaps they will feel lust or perhaps they will just see bodies.
in my opinion it is not wrong, it just is.

Hi Mao,

There was a thread on a similar theme a few weeks back. It may give some food for thought.

http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=19802

well thankx for the reply and links. It never a problems to me for the monks/sangha to have a facebook account or more, just to reach out, and spread teaching to the far and younger generation. But it sorta irks me to know that some might overused(abused?) the freedom of being in the www, by seeing them liking and subscribing to semi-porn pages?

FYI i'm still a a beginner in Dhamma knowledge, to have a reliable/good connected teacher is a lucky bonus. Yes i do understand it's hard to live in an monastic life with total celibacy, and i'm trying very hard not to judge, but it still scares me abit

Some monks are very diligent and austere and some monks are less so. The ones that get the most attention are usually the latter.

kitztack wrote: hi mao,
welcome to Dhammawheel
the images might give the monks a good idea of the hindrances they still have to deal with.
perhaps they will feel lust or perhaps they will just see bodies.
in my opinion it is not wrong, it just is.

Gazing upon a image like that would be a breach of the precept.

Mao wrote:
What i'm trying to ask is, if you can have an facebook account, you can have lotsa followers, you can add any people, like many pages. What if it pages of models/sexy entertainers/cute girls pictures provider. Is it wrong or am i too narrow mind?

Monks who behave skillfully would not indulge in such images. Although, simply seeing an image like that in passing, and indulging in it, are really not the same thing. The intention of the individual is what's important. If there is no intention to seek out such images, and no intention to dwell on them if they do happen to be encountered, I don't see the problem

Mao wrote: Correct me if i'm wrong. I do believe Buddhism is a religion who adapt to changes. No doubt to reach out to the lay people, especially around the world, now we can access to blogs, twitter and facebook of some great bhikkhu/teachers. But Is it a good ideal as the internet is a unlimited resource of info, wanted or unwanted(explicit ones).

What i'm trying to ask is, if you can have an facebook account, you can have lotsa followers, you can add any people, like many pages. What if it pages of models/sexy entertainers/cute girls pictures provider. Is it wrong or am i too narrow mind?

I find it odd that in your mind facebook is so important that it is synonymous with internet. There is more to internet than social networking. There are innuerable websites which do not have any 'racy' picture of women, why should there be any issue with viewing those websites. Sometimes using internet is a necessity for certain services: booking tickets for travel, registering complaints with utility, paying any bills and so on.

And as for social networking, it is not the preserve of one M. Zuckerberg. Or the spy machine that is Google+. Dhammawheel is also a type of social network. Why would anyone need facebook? There are many other -and arguable better- ways of staying in touch with people. Emails still works. Mailing lists still work. Forums still work. One can safely stay in touch with a group of like-minded people without the fear of accidentally coming across pornographic content.

Cittasanto wrote:

kitztack wrote: hi mao,
welcome to Dhammawheel
the images might give the monks a good idea of the hindrances they still have to deal with.
perhaps they will feel lust or perhaps they will just see bodies.
in my opinion it is not wrong, it just is.

Gazing upon a image like that would be a breach of the precept.

hi cittasanto
would seeing by chance an image like that be a breach of precepts?
im guessing by your use of the word gazing that you mean intentful viewing

Cittasanto wrote: Gazing upon a image like that would be a breach of the precept.

Could you please specify exactly which of the precepts?
I agree it would be a profoundly unhelpful thing for a monk to do, but I can't think of any of the 227
rules which might be broken.

It is a dukkata (wrongdoing) offence.

I remember going to my first retreat at Bodhi Monastery and of course they always ask to dress appropriately.. But i remember watching this one very beautiful retreatant running laps around the monastery in short shorts... Im not sure of any monks saw her but she peaked my lust for sure.

Then of course you have ajahn brahms story of coming out of meditation on the beach and seeing two young girls in bikinis sitting on either side of him...

I dont see the facebook issue being much different then what monks have to face out in the world. They, like us, can choose to act skillfully or not. This same monk could just go on google and search for pornography pictures if they wanted to. The issue is in the mind, not whats "out there".

The issue is in the mind, not whats "out there".

+1

gavesako wrote:It is a dukkata (wrongdoing) offence.

One of the thousands of commentarial dukkatas? Or canonical?
I know there is a commentarial dukkata in the Vinayamukha that prohibits touching pictures or statues of women. It's the same rule which states a monk should not save his mother from drowning if he has to touch her to do it!
I found that reference in Thanissaro's BMC, but I don't have access to the commentaries themselves right now.
I suppose looking at a picture is touching with the eyes...

James the Giant wrote:
I know there is a commentarial dukkata in the Vinayamukha that prohibits touching pictures or statues of women. It's the same rule which states a monk should not save his mother from drowning if he has to touch her to do it!

I am not familiar with the Vinaya commentaries but... really?!

That just strikes me as uncompassionately dogmatic.