jason c wrote:hey cittasanto,
i can only draw conclusions from the information you provide.
i believe i understand your views, but this is impossible to really know.
you said there were ten reasons the rules could be layed down (i could not find these) and you have not provided them. so my question, i'll re-phrase it, should a lost monk simply die of starvation? still stands.
i read a book called, mae chee kaew, you will find all the stories in there.
here they are,
VinMv 1.5.11 Ten Reasons for setting down the Rules of a Mendicant- Translated from the pali by Cittasanto wrote:Meditators, as this (offence) is so, I will prepare rules of discipline for mendicants (following my) path, basing them on ten reasons!
1 – To protect the excellent (reputation) of well behaved) members;
2 – To protect the comfort (due to respect) of (well behaved) members;
3 – To silence those who are obstinate;
4 – For diligent meditators to have ease (in obtaining requisites);
5 – For meditators to restrain their effluents in the here & now;
6 – For restraining effluents (that condition) future births;
7 – For faith to arise in those who lack faith;
8 – For the conditions to increase the faith of those already with faith;
9 – For the true way (to be visible) for along time;
10 – For assisting the discipline of those in Training.
These are the motivations I shall prepare the mendicants rules of training for!
how long do you think you can last without food? I've fasted for a while during my time living under the Atthasila and was perfectly fine with walking, and could of travelled far enough to reach another town for alms round if nececcary on the last day, and I know of people who have fasted for weeks, the longest I have fasted is for two weeks so the possibility of dying from starvation is very unlikely. especially when you consider there are allowances which are conditional for their uses. but ask yourself what is stopping them asking, there are only four rules they need to keep to stay as mendicants.
the only way people would develop compassion for them is if they knew that is what they done but as they don't ask for things without an invitation to do so it is left up to the person to work it out themselves. and in Buddhist counties it is incredibly unlikely they would go a day without food unless it was deliberate, such as fasting.
at Luang Ta Maha-Bua's monastery it is quite a common occurrence for people to fast, and it has been used for health reasons and spiritual practice for milenia, pythagoras and his senior students would fast for up to 40 days before the "deeper teachings" and there are mention of similar lengths of fasting all over the world.
The rules for mendicants
are for mindfulness, a lack of reproach so a direct development of hiri-ottapa & heedfulness for those who are following the mendicants form of training not for lay people. The Atthasila for lay people are for renunciation and are only practised one day a week or once/twice a month normally, although there are those who practice these as a form of training on a more permanent basis.
Mae Chee Kaew was not a bhikkhuni, she was a Mae Chee and followed the atthasila so didn't follow the full set of rules of the Bhikkhunis, the female mendicants who as I understand follow that particular rule also (although I would need to check). I do not know if Mae Chee's also follow other rules although the protocals & sikkha and some of the other rules from the vinaya are a possibility (it is reconed that there are about 10,000 rules in total).
this is what i've been arguing to cittasanto . how is the practice of meditation benefitted from these ancient rules. my position is this rule is meant to arouse compassion in others. ie; laypersons supporting the monastics, they otherwise may not do charitable acts, it also gives the monastic an opporotunity to spread the dhamma.
Like I said the rule for the Mendicants are not in your domain to need to be followed and you can follow the pancasila if you do not wish to follow the atthasila.
although you have previously stated
i did not say the remaining precepts are not relevant,
when I challanged you on questioning rules relevance that you are not expected to follow you denied it so are you arguing they are relevant or not?
Do note you are asking about the Mendicant rule, not the lay persons rule which is
Vikāla-bhojanā veramaṇī sikkhā-padaṃ samādiyāmi.
I take upon myself the precept for abstaining from Taking food after noon or during the night.
which has already been addressed here to some extent by members and has been addressed in other threads.
can you elaborate on your confusions, i feel what i've written is comprehensible.
your reply to hanzze will suffice.