When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Discussion of ordination, the Vinaya and monastic life. How and where to ordain? Bhikkhuni ordination etc.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17191
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by DNS »

pilgrim wrote:I remember the rule concerning mealtimes was made because a monk went out for alms late in the evening and frightened a villager in the dark.
If I recall correctly, it had more to do with a group of monks who went to a festival at the top of a mountain (at the wrong time, i.e., evening) to see a show and while there carried on with talk and food. The Buddha rebukes them more for eating at the wrong time than he does for attending a show.

The Buddha (in other places) also praises the one meal before noon for health reasons and also so that the lay people will not be burdened with preparing several meals for the monks.

I do not eat in the evening and thus I am free from illness and affliction and enjoy health, strength and ease’ (M.I,473)
User avatar
rowboat
Posts: 700
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:31 am
Location: Brentwood Bay

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by rowboat »

If I recall correctly, it had more to do with a group of monks who went to a festival at the top of a mountain (at the wrong time, i.e., evening) to see a show and while there carried on with talk and food. The Buddha rebukes them more for eating at the wrong time than he does for attending a show.
I distinctly remember listening to Bhikkhu Bodhi, on The MN, explaining how the rule concerning meal times was established after a bhikkhu frightened a woman. The bhikkhu suddenly appeared standing in the darkness after a bolt of lightning crashed and she went to the Sangha to complain about the fright she received.
Rain soddens what is covered up,
It does not sodden what is open.
Therefore uncover what is covered
That the rain will not sodden it.
Ud 5.5
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17191
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by DNS »

rowboat wrote: I distinctly remember listening to Bhikkhu Bodhi, on The MN, explaining how the rule concerning meal times was established after a bhikkhu frightened a woman. The bhikkhu suddenly appeared standing in the darkness after a bolt of lightning crashed and she went to the Sangha to complain about the fright she received.
Okay, that sounds familiar. But in any event, the Buddha also praises the one meal / no eating after 12 noon for other reasons, including health and not to burden the lay people.

Edit: I found that passage!
A bhikkhu wandering for food while it was still dark frightened a woman who saw him in the lightning flash. She mistook him for a demon and cried out "How terrible! A demon is after me!" (see Majjhima Nikaya No. 66).

Full quote:
Two hours or so will have passed in this way before it is light enough to gather food. Not only must the bhikkhus allow the laywomen (upasika) time to cook food, they also have to consider the dangers of going out while it is yet dark. In countries where snakes, centipedes and scorpions abound, it is wise to be able to see the ground under one's feet; and apart from this quite important fact there are the fears and suspicions of others to consider, as one rather amusing incident in the Majjhima Nikaya shows. A bhikkhu wandering for food while it was still dark frightened a woman who saw him in the lightning flash. She mistook him for a demon and cried out "How terrible! A demon is after me!" (see Middle Length Sayings No. 66).
from: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el073.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The above refers to a bhikkhu who frightened a woman going out in the morning before dawn, not at night.

And in fact the pacittiya 37 reference to not eating after noon mentions the group of monks going to the festival at "the wrong time" and also mentions that "each mouthful" is another pacittiya offense! (30 mouthfuls would be 30 offenses) Such was the importance laid down to this precept. (PTS, Vinaya Vol. 2, pacittiya 37)
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by Cittasanto »

pilgrim wrote:I remember the rule concerning mealtimes was made because a monk went out for alms late in the evening and frightened a villager in the dark.
actually there are several origin stories, that particular origin story is about going on alms during the night, or possibly before dawn. when there is not enough light to see properly.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by Cittasanto »

Bankei wrote:The rule about not touching money - isn't the wording about not handling gold and/or silver. The letter of the law may allow monks to handle bank accounts and paper money? What about credit cards.

I knew some Dhammayut monks in Thailand and they were strict not to touch money, but they still had some in envelopes. One asked me to take some money and go and buy him some bandages once.

Other monks refuse to touch money, but they are flying around the world frequently using temple donations.
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.

although the wording may be gold and silver it is obviously about money, and it is not the only one. paper, coin, or plastic would be included.
if there is an invitation somewhere the person inviting can arrange the flights etc, so it is not necessarily via temple donations but it may also be by temple donations. but it is the controle of money (also) which the rules deal with.
There is an article somewhere by a Thai monk which runs many pages and analyses the problems monks face when flying internationally (an increasingly common problem these days) with changing time zones. When is noon when flying from Osaka to Thailand for example?
monks I know fast when flying. saves the hassle.
I once stayed at a Sri Lankan temple in Australia and went into the kitchen at night time to get a drink - only to find all the monks in there eating.

When I was a monk in Thailand a senior monk sent out for some soup for me - clear chinese type with wontons in it. The Thai person I was with at the time was shocked, but eventually said I shouldn't eat the chunky bits, but only the soup. The monk was worried I would be hungry being a new monk - thus exhibiting kindness while perhaps breaking a minor rule.
there were other things which are allowable he could of offered you! but the monks eating, is strange, and possible breaking the rule depending on what they ate....
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by Cittasanto »

David N. Snyder wrote:
pilgrim wrote:I remember the rule concerning mealtimes was made because a monk went out for alms late in the evening and frightened a villager in the dark.
If I recall correctly, it had more to do with a group of monks who went to a festival at the top of a mountain (at the wrong time, i.e., evening) to see a show and while there carried on with talk and food. The Buddha rebukes them more for eating at the wrong time than he does for attending a show.

The Buddha (in other places) also praises the one meal before noon for health reasons and also so that the lay people will not be burdened with preparing several meals for the monks.

I do not eat in the evening and thus I am free from illness and affliction and enjoy health, strength and ease’ (M.I,473)
it is an origin story, but not butrening a vilige with many different alms rounds was the origin story which led to the final rule of between dawn & noon.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings cittasanto,

Being an "origin story" though doesn't mean that it accurately provides the origin of the rule.

I'm not interested to get into a debate on the historical accuracy of these stories, but if they don't reliably give the Buddha's actual reasons and logic for introducing new rules, then they don't necessarily embody the "spirit" of the rules either. They might well be representing somebody else's "spirit", embodied into a story... and I'd hate to see the "letter" (as decreed by the Buddha) diminished because of a "spirit" designed and interpreted by someone else. It would be Mahayana all over again.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by Cittasanto »

there are a few origin stories which do seam odd to the rule they are in, I can not remember which rule of the example I have in mind they are in, but....

the origin stories clarify the rules, they are not apocryphal literature, and to understand the spirit of a rule they are needed.

they also show how a rule ended up as it is found in the patimokkha list, as some rules were amended, and in some cases several times.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Cittasanto,

I know you've studied Vinaya more than I have, so I'm prepared to defer to your judgement to some extent, but in light of all the different "early schools" and their various Vinaya compositions, it's hard to put much stock in any of those early traditions as being in a position to definitively define the "spirit" of the rules within their varying rule sets.

For that, they must in turn defer judgement to the Buddha, and unless they are the Buddha, they have to accept they have only received the letter even if they'd like to each think (in their own different ways) that they have actually grasped "the spirit".

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by Cittasanto »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Cittasanto,

I know you've studied Vinaya more than I have, so I'm prepared to defer to your judgement to some extent, but in light of all the different "early schools" and their various Vinaya compositions, it's hard to put much stock in any of those early traditions as being in a position to definitively define the "spirit" of the rules within their varying rule sets.

For that, they must in turn defer judgement to the Buddha, and unless they are the Buddha, they have to accept they have only received the letter even if they'd like to each think (in their own different ways) that they have actually grasped "the spirit".

Metta,
Retro. :)
Yes I see your point better now!
but it is my understanding, and I may well be wrong, but, the origin stories are the same, only where the final rule is different, do they differ.
and on occasion the wording is different also, but this can open up a rule more, or just be a grammar thing?

however within the origin stories the Buddha always clarifies the situation and makes a judgement, not another, so your argument could be applied to the suttas equally, it requires just as much faith.

it is worth remembering that the Theravada set of rules is almost like the basic set all the vinaya lines have (as far as I am aware) with only minor differences. I did share a PDF of a comparison of the Bhikkhu matika which shows the different placement/differences the Dharmagupta (it calls it the mahayana vinaya so I believe it is refering to this school) and Theravada vinaya has.

btw the origin story I am thinking of would be in the sanghadisesa, and involves venerable udayin his wife and sensuality, but the rule and focus is far from that aspect.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: When do the "spirit" and the "letter" come into conflict?

Post by daverupa »

Origin stories are mostly later than the rules they purport to describe; this is a matter of philology. This doesn't mean they are false, but it does mean there is room for embellishment and, potentially, legend.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
Post Reply