When did handling money become so common?

[sunnat]

It may help to understand what exactly 'money' is.

One may point to a pile of coins and say 'that is money'. Conventionally that is true but today the true essence of mnoney is fiat*. Thus the money a monk may handle today intrinsically has no value. Its 'value' is wholly dependent on faith in the authority of a government.

In the days of Buddha money was 'commodity money' based on (presumably gold) whatever commodity is desired. It can be salt or some shiny trinket etc.



*"Fiat money is a currency that lacks intrinsic value and is established as a legal tender by government regulation. Traditionally, currencies were backed by physical commodities such as silver and gold, but fiat money is based on the creditworthiness of the issuing government.

The value of fiat money depends on supply and demand and was introduced as an alternative to commodity money and representative money. Commodity money is created from precious metals such as gold and silver, while representative money represents a claim on a commodity that can be redeemed." - https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/r ... -currency/

[robertk]

Here is another thread

https://classicaltheravada.org/t/are-bu ... -money/355

[robertk]

As to why it is so common among monks these days.
I think it is just one of the indicators of the decline in the sasana as the centuries pass.

Monks know handling money is totally against the vinaya but value convenience more.

[Sam Vara]

I don't think the monks in the Thai Forest Tradition handle money at all. Our local monastery has lay supporters who take care of such things.

I didn't meet any monks in other lineages for many years, but when I did I was quite shocked to see them use money and credit cards. They were more strict in a few areas, but in general were much more lax in their practice.

[User13866]

It was agreed in the second Buddhist council that monastics should not handle money, but that was obviously a very long time ago. Do the subsequent councils ever talk about this? Im curious if this is something that just developed gradually over centuries or if its just something that kinda developed in the modern era (due to things like modern property tax laws, and the fact that you cant pay your water and electricity bill with food and robe offerings).

As far as i know the matter of using money was an issue already at the 2nd council and the Sthavira didn't like it.

If i recall correctly those that became Sthavira criticized the using of money, going for alms several times, using cloth without borders, and other vinaya things.

How interesting. I wonder if this started with any of the early Buddhist schools.

As far as i can tell the Sthavira dividing from Mahadanghika is considered the first schism and everything before wasn't sectarian.

Sthavira eventually divided into many schools including the ancestor of the Sri Lankan Theravada. Whereas Mahasanghikas went on to split into schools which accepted the Mahayana teachings and those who did not accept the Mahayana teachings like the Kukkutikas.

Not long before Buddha's parinibbana he said that the sangha could abandon the minor & lesser rules but the 1st Council couldn't establish what exact rules these were and so it was decided by those at the council that no rules should be abandoned.

However i think that it didn't stop groups here & there from abandoning the rules they saw as lesser & minor and using gold & silver would become widespread in no long time.

[User13866]

As far i know,

Not using money nowadays is for the most part a priviledge that only the big monasteries have. There is then enough kappiya and donors to do everything for the monks. To arrange transportation, to arrange visas, to pay for renewal of passports and whatnot.

As far as i know there are very few monks outside of these super monasteries who have this option and being affiliated with such a monastery comes with strings attached.

Outside of these exceptional monasteries monks generally use at least some money for cases of emergency and emergent needs otherwise.

The independent monks who neither use money nor passports are extremely rare and are often deprived of legal & social security and in many cases access to healthcare.

As far as i can tell this is generally true for foreign monks. If one is native to the country then it's easier to avoid using money.

I am weighing the pros & cons of ordination myself and let me tell you it's not very tempting to ordain at the big monasteries, it's not very tempting to use money and it's not very tempting to be without a passport.

[User13866]

I think that monks not using money can be because they are extremely poor or because they are essentially treated like kings who do not have to use money because lay people attend to their every need.

When was the last time these monks had to make use of discarded rags or drink urine for medicine?

When donations are coming in a thousand fold of what is needed and there are several kappiya willing to drop what they are doing to attend to your needs then it's rather easy to not use money...

I don't fault the monks who are treated like superstars but i also realize that this is a very priviledged circumstance. I wouldn't hold them up as generally superior to a monk who chooses to carry a small amount of money to get around and yet they are superior in that they don't use money.

In general i think this is a very loaded topic and has little to do with the individual monk but more so with the social structures that now exist.

[TRobinson465]

As far i know,

Not using money nowadays is for the most part a priviledge that only the big monasteries have. There is then enough kappiya and donors to do everything for the monks. To arrange transportation, to arrange visas, to pay for renewal of passports and whatnot.

As far as i know there are very few monks outside of these super monasteries who have this option and being affiliated with such a monastery comes with strings attached.

Outside of these exceptional monasteries monks generally use at least some money for cases of emergency and emergent needs otherwise.

The independent monks who neither use money nor passports are extremely rare and are often deprived of legal & social security and in many cases access to healthcare.

As far as i can tell this is generally true for foreign monks. If one is native to the country then it's easier to avoid using money.

I am weighing the pros & cons of ordination myself and let me tell you it's not very tempting to ordain at the big monasteries, it's not very tempting to use money and it's not very tempting to be without a passport.

Oh yeah I noticed this too when I went to Thailand. It's virtually impossible for monks at most monasteries to not handle money. Ppl who only have exposure to well supported western monasteries or monasteries in popular traditions don't seem to get this. You literally go explore any local temple outside of these two kinds and it seems almost impossible not to handle money. Unless they live off the grid and have no water or electricity bills. Not to say that I haven't been to temples that probably could avoid handling money but do anyways but that is a different debate.

[TRobinson465]

However i think that it didn't stop groups here & there from abandoning the rules they saw as lesser & minor and using gold & silver would become widespread in no long time.

Yes that's most likely how it happened. They also seems to have abandoned the not showering more often than once a Fortnight rule. Although I am very grateful they decided not to continue following that rule.

[sunnat]

“Traditionally, currencies were backed by physical commodities such as silver and gold, but fiat money is based on the creditworthiness of the issuing government.”

suppose one could run with this and consider that the baht is pegged to the US dollar. In 1971 Nixon (wars in SE Asia) disconnected the dollar from the gold standard. From then on it was fiat currency.

Perhaps at that point it was realised that money was intrinsically worthless and I wonder if monks who handle fiat currency as easily would also handle gold?

[santa100]

Whether it's gold, silver, paper money,.... is not the point, the point is the inherent power/capability this commodity enable one to buy virtually anything and everything, wherever, whenever, and however one wants that is particularly troublesome to those who have already took the vow of renunciation. As mentioned in my previous post, during the full ordination ceremony, each individual monk/nun have to recite the Vinaya rules one by one and promise to observe and uphold them, while fully aware that they WILL break them eventually. So if money handling is allowed, all monastics would've already broken the 4th precept of lying/false-speech way before the full ordination ceremony is completed! Even in a cut-throat environment like corporate America, if one's caught lying on his resume, s/he'd get the boot in a hurry. So it seems like there're only 2 professions that fully endorse lying: monasticism and politics

[TRobinson465]

As mentioned in my previous post, during the full ordination ceremony, each individual monk/nun have to recite the Vinaya rules one by one and promise to observe and uphold them, while fully aware that they WILL break them eventually. ]

This isn't true. I've ordained temporarily before. When doing the upasampada you never recite the patimokkha. Only the preceptor does and you accept them. You don't actually recite them yourself

[santa100]

This isn't true. I've ordained temporarily before. When doing the upasampada you never recite the patimokkha. Only the preceptor does and you accept them. You don't actually recite them yourself

What do you mean "ordained temporarily"? Does that criteria qualify at a full-ordination level, ie. you're treated as a full-time candidate that have to testify to observe the full 227 Patimokkha rules? What's the name of that temple and the location that provided this "ordained temporarily" service to you? All the ones that I've been to here in the States, fully-ordained candidates all had to agree to observe and uphold 227 Patimokkha rules. And say, even if you don't recite the rules themselves, the fact that you said you "accept" them meant there's a already binding contract between the bhikkhu and his Vinaya, hence, any subsequent precept violation would have to be testified and go thru due-process in accordance with what's written in the Vinaya. Anything short of that, and the bhikkhu would've committed the crime of lying. And if s/he continues to wear the orange robe, enjoy all the nice perks that monastic life provides FOR FREE while consciously breaking the precepts, then s/he's no different from that dirty corrupted US Congressman!

[DNS]

Back in the Buddha's time they didn't have water and electricity bills so they could function without money at all and not need lay staff to depend on. In order to follow the rule today you pretty much have to have lay staff nowadays unless your temple is off the grid and doesn't use running water or electricity, but lay staff is not a luxury every temple has.

Good question about when did it become so common among the monks. My guess is around the time of industrialization and greater numbers of urban monasteries, so perhaps around 1900 and after. Prior to that, like you said, there was no electricity, air conditioning, etc. so it was easier to get by just on lunch dana. Nowadays monks and nuns travel far and wide using airplanes, cars, etc, some even shop at grocery stores when there is no family to provide lunch dana on some days of the month.

However, it could still be done without handling money, with lay stewards or anagarikas. As SV noted, the Thai forest tradition is pretty good at following the no money rule.

[TRobinson465]

This isn't true. I've ordained temporarily before. When doing the upasampada you never recite the patimokkha. Only the preceptor does and you accept them. You don't actually recite them yourself

What do you mean "ordained temporarily"?

Are you joking? virtually every thai temple has a temporary ordination program. In none of them do the ordinands recite the patimokkha themselves, the preceptor does and you accept them. They of course tell you the 227 rules tho. I have been to no monastery that follows every single rule. even the ones that do get by by not handling money do not follow the not showering more often than a fortnight rule afaik.