gavesako wrote:Exactly. The question of patronage has never been very far from the minds of Theravada monks residing in large communities and temples.
In fact, there are many references in the Vinaya commentraries as to ways of handling monastic property (such as land, animals, crops, etc.) that monks are not allowed to handle themselves but they can get a kappiya-karaka (steward, helper) to do it for them. Whether this still conforms to the Buddha's original intention is questionable of course... (as well as handling money)
Bankei wrote: There is an interesting lecture by Gregory Schopen of UCLA available on the net.
Lecture title is "Buddha as Businessman?"
mikenz66 wrote:historical analysis is quite a different thing from practise.
Indrajala wrote:If someone wants to give you money, you can apparently blindfold a trustworthy layman and lead him to a secret place where he can deposit the money before leading him out.
daverupa wrote:mikenz66 wrote:historical analysis is quite a different thing from practise.
Not really; the stories we tell ourselves about the Triple Gem and their contexts are examples of the histories we repeatedly engage with in our practices. This is even what the Nikayas are - certain sorts of histories, and the stories we tell about them and, perhaps more importantly, about their meanings, are quite central to our practical concerns.
A choice to engage with historical scholarship is therefore a component of practice, as is a choice to not engage.
Dhammanando wrote:Where is it stated that this can be done? Are you referring to some deviant folk practice or to something authorised in the Pali Vinaya texts?
mikenz66 wrote:When carried out as an intellectual exercise by not-practising scholars, such analyses are not necessarily particularly useful for elucidating Dhamma practice. I think the discussion of Scopen on this thread illustrates that. It may, of course, be helpful in the hands of some practitioners.
Indrajala wrote:Power struggles, greed, intolerance and so on are far more revealing about the realities of Buddhadharma on the ground than the prescriptive descriptions given in scripture.
chownah wrote:Indrajala wrote:Power struggles, greed, intolerance and so on are far more revealing about the realities of Buddhadharma on the ground than the prescriptive descriptions given in scripture.
Isn't this like saying that the squabbling which occurs among astronomers is more revealing of the cosmos than is the papers they produce? Doesn't ring true somehow.
In other words, much of the Vinaya canon is arguably less about liberation and more about keeping up appearances to keep the offerings coming in. Bear in mind Buddhists were competing with other śramaṇa groups, most notably the Jains who sold a better image of purity than any Buddhist bhikṣu could.
Bankei wrote:There is an interesting lecture by Gregory Schopen of UCLA available on the net.
Lecture title is "Buddha as Businessman?"
http://blog.beliefnet.com/onecity/2009/ ... ssman.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
BuddhaSoup wrote:The Chinese Canon differs from the Pali Canon, and it includes vinayas from other schools.
I'm not a scholar by far of the Vinaya pitaka of the Pali Canon, but as it passed through the filter of Sri Lankan monastics, it likely changed very little from the Buddha's Vinaya.
If the compilers of the various Vinayas considered it ‘highly important’ to regulate the lives of their monks so as to give no cause for complaint to the laity, and if considerations of this sort could only have assumed high importance after buddhist groups had permanently settled down, then, since the latter almost certainly did not occur until well after Aśoka, it would be obvious that all the Vinayas that we have are late, precisely as both Wassilieff and Lévi have suggested a hundred years ago.
Even in the later inscriptions from Bharhut and Sanchi there are no references to vihāras, and they begin to appear—though still rarely—only in Kharosṭḥī records of a little before and a little after the Common Era, about the same time that the first indications of permanent monastic residential quarters begin to appear in the archaeological record for the Northwest, and this is not likely to be mere coincidence.
To suggest that the Vinaya Pitaka of the Pali Canon is more related to the maintenance of appearances to encourage wealth building seems quite incorrect.
Users browsing this forum: Sokehi and 11 guests