Intention. The Vinita-vatthu contains cases of a bhikkhu who caresses his mother out of filial affection, one who caresses his daughter out of fatherly affection, and one who caresses his sister out of brotherly affection. In each case the penalty is a dukkaṭa.
3) He lives in unbecoming association with householders.
gavesako wrote:Just to give you the perspective on Sangha problems in Thailand:
Bringing things out in the open
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/2 ... n-the-open
Suffering is asking from life what it can never give you.
mindfulness, bliss and beyond (page 8) wrote:Do not linger on the past. Do not keep carrying around coffins full of dead moments
Ytrog wrote:Why was the clergical structure in Thailand centralised btw? How did people react to it? Doens't such a system has a high chance for corruption by tempting people (in this case monks) with power?
gavesako wrote:we must study that rule with enthusiasm and respect.
AN 3.85 wrote:With reference to the lesser and minor training rules, he falls into offenses and rehabilitates himself... But as for the training rules that are basic to the holy life and proper to the holy life, he is one of permanent virtue, one of steadfast virtue.
Cittasanto wrote:Hi BuddhaSoup
You may wish to read the rest of the rule in the Vibangha, the section of the Vinaya which clarifies the rules and provides the origin stories.
the rule wording doesn't always give a clue as to the full extent the rule covers.
Cittasanto wrote:it is canonical literature which spell out the rules it isn't really up for historicity debate!
cooran wrote:Hello all,
The Vinaya must be kept strictly. One has only to consider the mess in the Roman Catholic Church with tens of thousands of once hidden offenses against children and women by ''celibate'' clergy. n.b. I am definitely not impugning our Sangha members whom I respect, but absolute adherence to the Vinaya is needed to prevent any rot setting in.
BuddhaSoup wrote:My own view is that it is very important that the Vinaya rules be followed, such that the concern that the Dhamma will erode over time is not realized.
I also feel that the Dhamma could be subject to erosion if the Dhamma is made so rigid and so colorless so as to not allow for basic human kindness expressed out of only the most positive of intentions. If a monk giving a hug to a lonely and hungry child is seen with shock, and perceived as an offense, my worry is that Dhamma will be left as the domain for only the strictest of views.
The Dhamma must be guarded carefully and the intent of Buddha must be followed, but not at the expense of making this living and breathing practice so inflexible that few choose its path.
Just as a Bhikkhu would not let a woman drown in a lake for fear of touching her, I believe that some latitude is required for (nonsexual) loving and compassionate acts. Again, the intent of the actor is paramount. I believe that the Dhamma will not only survive, but it will live and breathe with vibrancy for eons if some reasonable, ethical, and compassionate latitude is embraced by those lay and ordained that practice it.
Registered users: Bhikkhu_Samahita, Bing [Bot], BuddhaSoup, convivium, cooran, Feathers, fivebells, Google [Bot], JohnWB, Magoo, maitreya31, Majestic-12 [Bot], mettafuture, reflection, retrofuturist, thaijeppe, upekha