• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Respect toward the monastics.

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
When it comes to respecting within religions/spiritual paths I understand that for those who have gone forth and become a monk or a nun, the laypeople would be respectful to the monastics, because the path of monastic life is not an easy one. And yes the monastic people do study the scriptures all the time and will by this gain deeper wisdom of how to live a righteous life.

But there may be the other way around too, that as a monk or nun they would also understand that being respectful toward the laypeople is a part of being a monk or nun.
To be a teacher (i speak of dhamma teacher here) take time to be "good enough" to give truthful teaching to the laypeople. and in my understanding (can be wrong of course) there will be different answers given to different people because of the wisdom level they are on, they may not understand the deeper teachings.

To get into an argument with a monastic is unwise in my experience, and i will from now refrain from direct discussion with monastics, but yes i will ask questions still.
And yes it is allowed to disagree with the monk or nun, but it would be good for all that it was done in a respectful way :)
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
How can Upasaka call himself Buddhist, even Streamenter, =holly person then, if he does not even have found firm refuge?

Isn't that strange, since your spiritual parents, back to the Buddha, had been recluses? As for why the Buddha did not pay any regard toward householder, and why he even forbade his monks to do such, he might know, or?

If not, the basic training, merits, Veneration, refuge, might be traceable here: Respect and Reverence.

Like children of Gods nourish on their parents reputation, children of the Buddha do so as well, but less are of gratitude, and not only after gain from their heritage when they might be "hopeful" gone.

He may read also the very first story, found in the literary heritage, not out of reason the first.

Brahman @Jim had opened a good topic in that regard today, the very first step of giving up oneself and lay it into a guide.
 
Last edited:

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
In regard of the question "how to learn about communities, this was told:

One has, for the most, to visit they homes or wait till one of their parents appears, since those "back-yards", religious forums, are not different then children meeting each other and boast with their parents and claim borred possessions of them being their... but it's not easy that one does, since children fear authorities and prefer to play just arround with like-minded, Brahman Jim. And when will he risk to invite in his home or does he feel ashamed for his parents or his playmates in such a case?

And it's not only a moder buddhist phenomena. While monks, clergy, might be beyond simply selling off in sharing what ever Ism, householder are for the most just interest in gains by giving community pride and trade with Isms.

In that way they are no lightlight at all, disregarding their parents, will not be praised by the wise, laypeople and monks alike.

Religions, all, have already disappeared for the most and all they have left are tiny strings by God google.

But it's not so, that not knowing in advanced, that those who push other from stairways, are in many cases their children.

Here your are. Parents can live, and leave with it.

People gather together, again and again, on an element. Those upward, those downward, alike.

And my person understands well the causes of feeling not well, when children are approached by parents, not seldom do they even kill them to hide there secrets and be able to trade on.

Nevertheless, good to tell clear of what was actually known. May Nyom find ways to gain refuge and have ways to renew them, if even ever taken.

...it's as if there were two households with doors, and a man of good eyesight, standing there between them, would see people entering & leaving a house, wandering out & about. In the same way, I — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — see beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discern how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their actions: 'O, how these beings — who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech, & mind, who did not revile noble ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of right views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in a good destination, the heavenly world. Or how these beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the realm of the hungry ghosts. Or how these beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the animal womb. Or how these beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in a plane of deprivation, a bad destination, a lower realm, hell.'...Devaduta Sutta: The Deva Messengers


There is no more reason for any effort here. Being left over is once choice, even to gather with likewise is ones choice. Nobody can force someone to wise.

Metta
 
Last edited:

JJ50

Well-Known Member
When it comes to respecting within religions/spiritual paths I understand that for those who have gone forth and become a monk or a nun, the laypeople would be respectful to the monastics, because the path of monastic life is not an easy one. And yes the monastic people do study the scriptures all the time and will by this gain deeper wisdom of how to live a righteous life.

But there may be the other way around too, that as a monk or nun they would also understand that being respectful toward the laypeople is a part of being a monk or nun.
To be a teacher (i speak of dhamma teacher here) take time to be "good enough" to give truthful teaching to the laypeople. and in my understanding (can be wrong of course) there will be different answers given to different people because of the wisdom level they are on, they may not understand the deeper teachings.

To get into an argument with a monastic is unwise in my experience, and i will from now refrain from direct discussion with monastics, but yes i will ask questions still.
And yes it is allowed to disagree with the monk or nun, but it would be good for all that it was done in a respectful way :)

Considering the bad things committed by many of these people over the years, it isn't a good life, and very abnormal.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Respect should underlie our interactions with all peoples. How much more so our teachers and elders. The availability of universal education accessible to all has changed the nature of religious hierarchy. In the past religious leaders, monks and nuns were amongst the privileged few who could read and write. Such people had the opportunity to study the sacred texts.

Now the sacred texts are available to all. Furthermore, as many practitioners of the spiritual path know, it is the practice of spiritual principles in our day to day life that’s important. While we still need teachers, we need also to become active participants in our personal education, not passive recipients. The best learning is through practice. What we learn most is through the good example set by others in deed not word.

So the relationship between teacher and student, monk and layman has forever changed. While monks and nuns have played an essential role in a bygone era, their role in modern educated communities is ambiguous.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
When it comes to respecting within religions/spiritual paths I understand that for those who have gone forth and become a monk or a nun, the laypeople would be respectful to the monastics, because the path of monastic life is not an easy one. And yes the monastic people do study the scriptures all the time and will by this gain deeper wisdom of how to live a righteous life.

But there may be the other way around too, that as a monk or nun they would also understand that being respectful toward the laypeople is a part of being a monk or nun.
To be a teacher (i speak of dhamma teacher here) take time to be "good enough" to give truthful teaching to the laypeople. and in my understanding (can be wrong of course) there will be different answers given to different people because of the wisdom level they are on, they may not understand the deeper teachings.

To get into an argument with a monastic is unwise in my experience, and i will from now refrain from direct discussion with monastics, but yes i will ask questions still.
And yes it is allowed to disagree with the monk or nun, but it would be good for all that it was done in a respectful way :)

As I see it, people should be respectful toward each other regardless of whether or not one is monastic.

My understandings as a householder are every bit as valid as those of of a monk. Just because I choose to be a householder doesn't make me any less worthy of respect afforded to monastics.
 
Last edited:

JJ50

Well-Known Member
I have absolutely no respect for the Catholic ideology which has caused so much harm over the centuries and continues to do so.:mad:
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
I have absolutely no respect for the Catholic ideology which has caused so much harm over the centuries and continues to do so.:mad:
:rolleyes:
That is a false narrative. An overgeneralization.

Human beings cause 'harm'. Catholic ideology has not.. oh, there have been needed corrections, as in the reformation, but it is a bit hyperbolic to blame all the evils of man on 'catholic ideology!'

Can you give an example of the horrible 'harm!', that catholic ideology has done, over the centuries? Leave out the persecution of protestants during the reformation, since that was against bible thumpers, and any persecution of them is always ok. ;)
 

JJ50

Well-Known Member
:rolleyes:
That is a false narrative. An overgeneralization.

Human beings cause 'harm'. Catholic ideology has not.. oh, there have been needed corrections, as in the reformation, but it is a bit hyperbolic to blame all the evils of man on 'catholic ideology!'

Can you give an example of the horrible 'harm!', that catholic ideology has done, over the centuries? Leave out the persecution of protestants during the reformation, since that was against bible thumpers, and any persecution of them is always ok. ;)

The Spanish Inquisition, the banning of contraceptives and abortion. Saying a few stupid hail Mary's is supposed to purge a person of their crimes, many of which should have been reported to the police, but under the seal of the confessional the priest wasn't permitted to do so. Then of course there are the paedophile priests who have been protected by that church so they continued to abuse children.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
Death is coming for us all. There is no escape. But the civilized human perspective is to let death run its course, not manage or engineer it for others.

People get sick. They get depressed or discouraged. To encourage or offer a man made death conflicts with the sanctity of human life, and opens up death by decree, or death for expediency, or eventually, death for cultural cleansing. It has happened too many times, in human history, to give the carte blanche power of death to fickle, fallible human beings.

Death may not be the end. There may be a soul, that continues in another dimension or expression.

As for me, i look forward to my own death. I have for years. The prospect grips and excites me. But i am content leaving the gruesome details in the Hands of Providence.

I hope to die peacefully in my sleep.. like my Grandfather. ..not screaming in terror like his passengers...




.ok, ok.. sorry. I couldn't resist that! ;)
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
The Spanish Inquisition, the banning of contraceptives and abortion. Saying a few stupid hail Mary's is supposed to purge a person of their crimes, many of which should have been reported to the police, but under the seal of the confessional the priest wasn't permitted to do so. Then of course there are the paedophile priests who have been protected by that church so they continued to abuse children.
So, 'catholic ideology!', promotes and encourages this behavior?

The evil of man is well documented, and transcends all race, creed, gender, age, and ideology. So unless the ideology actively endorses and promotes said behavior, it does not seem fair to blame an entire ideology, with billions of adherents, over the actions of transgressors.
:shrug:
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
When it comes to respecting within religions/spiritual paths I understand that for those who have gone forth and become a monk or a nun, the laypeople would be respectful to the monastics, because the path of monastic life is not an easy one. And yes the monastic people do study the scriptures all the time and will by this gain deeper wisdom of how to live a righteous life.

But there may be the other way around too, that as a monk or nun they would also understand that being respectful toward the laypeople is a part of being a monk or nun.
To be a teacher (i speak of dhamma teacher here) take time to be "good enough" to give truthful teaching to the laypeople. and in my understanding (can be wrong of course) there will be different answers given to different people because of the wisdom level they are on, they may not understand the deeper teachings.

To get into an argument with a monastic is unwise in my experience, and i will from now refrain from direct discussion with monastics, but yes i will ask questions still.
And yes it is allowed to disagree with the monk or nun, but it would be good for all that it was done in a respectful way :)

Not all religions have monasticism as an essential aspect. The amount of interaction between lay people and monks also varies a ton. So does the nature of the monastic communities. Some are just far stricter than others.

But I agree with what others have said: respect should be between all humans. There is a way to disagree respectfully.

There are also many folks who, having never interacted or been around monks, still make judgement from a distance, assuming monks are all the same.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I respect monastics as a personal choice, but consider it a form of materialism in that they believe that the life style of isolation, denial of material things, and sexuality leads to a greater wisdom, knowledge or enlightenment (?).

I am an advocate of the Middle Way, a way of life living life in the real world without regard to asceticism and indulgence of material things. Before I became a Baha'i I live a life based on the 'Wandering Monk,' and believed in a non-Temple lifestyle, actually I still live my life that way. This in part resulted in a long life of the Arts of the Way (Martial Arts).
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
How can Upasaka call himself Buddhist, even Streamenter, =holly person then, if he does not even have found firm refuge?

Isn't that strange, since your spiritual parents, back to the Buddha, had been recluses? As for why the Buddha did not pay any regard toward householder, and why he even forbade his monks to do such, he might know, or?

If not, the basic training, merits, Veneration, refuge, might be traceable here: Respect and Reverence.

Like children of Gods nourish on their parents reputation, children of the Buddha do so as well, but less are of gratitude, and not only after gain from their heritage when they might be "hopeful" gone.

He may read also the very first story, found in the literary heritage, not out of reason the first.

Brahman @Jim had opened a good topic in that regard today, the very first step of giving up oneself and lay it into a guide.
Venerable Samana Johan you asked how i can call my self a Buddhist. That is a valid question and i will try to answer to my ability.

At the time of the buddha he saw good in layman and he saw good in those who tried to be righteous. . This lifetime is not the right for me to be a full ordained monastic practitioner, and it is not the person Amanaki who has put the sotapanna upon my name. That was a senior monk who saw within Amanaki. The difference between Samana Johann and Amanaki is that you have gone forth to be a monk and the path Amanaki take is a different one where no full ordination has happen (it might happen) So for the sake of our future discussion you can see me as a layman, that is not an offense toward me. I also know that in the country you are ordained, the monastic people are seen as something above human beings. My teacher asked me to never see my self as anything at all. In the sake of discussion in the forum the word "I" is used to write proper English, but that does not mean there is a ego behind it.
I have seen people who write without using the word "I" but still, there has been a huge ego behind the writing, that is not being without ego.
Do i fail to do that from time to time, yes i do from time to time. But that is the time a person should look within and not look at others and how they live their life.
Do i have more to understand, yes ofcourse all humans who has not yet become enlighten have things to correct in their life.
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
poorly informed by google and corrupt, does he live ensnared and caught like any other householder here, enjoys sensual pleasures and has no idea of the holly life.

To your information sir, I have a teacher in the Wat thai temple and the second thing.
I live in celibacy and even i do have a female in the same house there is no need for what you accused me for.

Should a monk really accuse a layperson of falsehood when monk do not know the answer him self?
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
May Upasaka go on as he feels fit, and regard my persons approach here as improper, right from beginning. May all find the way (of action) to true happiness for themselves with ease.

If seeking for guidance and what is proper to do, those having left societies seriously, in all regards, would never cut of ways that others may follow, as long as the same left and its a matter of compassion to let it be known that there are only very less left and traceable in this world-time and darkness increases in horribly speed.

May no one wast time for useless sacrifices toward of which is not worthy to give into. Be aware to live far aways in lands of grave wrong view and in association which is not a little conductive for either Jhana, paths or fruits, not to speak of final liberation.

The generous hospitality having been given, as well as the many small but huge sacrifices which have been given by many here, had been seen and there is nothing to fear that those fruits may not be for great bliss. mudita

May many of you do not hope that death might be their liberation, but put eager effort in good work. It's only good Labour, voluntary made, well instructed what to do, that makes free.
 

Samana Johann

Restricted by request
Should a monk really accuse a layperson
Neither would such be given for Bhikkhus (it's actually against the rules for Bhikkhus, to reveal wrong doings of lay people), as a protection for the Sangha at large, nor is there any should or task to. Most could not warn or correct you, bound. Why and for what use another does such, might be foolishness, strive for gain in wrong ways or a gift of someone who had reached independency.

May Nyom go on as he feels fit and don't feel burdened by words of a came across "beggar".
 

JJ50

Well-Known Member
So, 'catholic ideology!', promotes and encourages this behavior?

The evil of man is well documented, and transcends all race, creed, gender, age, and ideology. So unless the ideology actively endorses and promotes said behavior, it does not seem fair to blame an entire ideology, with billions of adherents, over the actions of transgressors.
:shrug:

I would say that expecting priests and nuns to be celibate, which is unnatural, could encourage that sort of behaviour, even though no way does it excuse it.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
When it comes to respecting within religions/spiritual paths I understand that for those who have gone forth and become a monk or a nun, the laypeople would be respectful to the monastics, because the path of monastic life is not an easy one. And yes the monastic people do study the scriptures all the time and will by this gain deeper wisdom of how to live a righteous life.

But there may be the other way around too, that as a monk or nun they would also understand that being respectful toward the laypeople is a part of being a monk or nun.
To be a teacher (i speak of dhamma teacher here) take time to be "good enough" to give truthful teaching to the laypeople. and in my understanding (can be wrong of course) there will be different answers given to different people because of the wisdom level they are on, they may not understand the deeper teachings.

To get into an argument with a monastic is unwise in my experience, and i will from now refrain from direct discussion with monastics, but yes i will ask questions still.
And yes it is allowed to disagree with the monk or nun, but it would be good for all that it was done in a respectful way :)
Yours has been my experience as well.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
I have absolutely no respect for the Catholic ideology which has caused so much harm over the centuries and continues to do so.:mad:
And this is what can be concluded when one makes the exceptions to the rule the rule itself. Why focus only on the immorality that the Church does not teach is morally acceptable? Such blanket stereotyping, even within itself, is unethical as responsible parents teach their children not to stereotype others.
BTW, do you think "agnostics" are really any different in the long run?
 
Top