|
|
|
|
|
Some sections on this site can only be properly viewed using the MOZPALI Font for the insertion of diacritical marks. If you wish to view these items properly, download this font and install it: [ PC: download here] [Mac: download here]
[ Dhamma Talk ]
See: Showing Respect to the Sangha
I HEAR TELL, once upon a time, Bhante Udayin, Kamandaya town, Brahmin Todeyya's mango grove, came a revisit'n.
Then one time a young man, a student of a Nobel Lady of the Verahaccani clan, came visiting Bhante Udayin, and there, after exchanging common courtesies, he sat down to one side and listened as Bhante Udayin taught, grounded, raised up, and made that young man happy with dhamma talk worthy of respect.
Then, after being taught, grounded, raised up, and made happy by that worthy DhammaTalk of Bhante Udayin, that young man returned to his residence with the Nobel Lady of the Verahaccani clan and said: "If it please your Ladyship, I would inform her that the beggar Udayin is presently teaching Dhamma that is helpful in the beginning, helpful in the middle and helpful at the end. He lays out the way to live the best of lives, the way to perfect and refine the best of lives, and he does so both in the spirit and the letter.[1a]
"Well then, young man, please invite this Beggar Udayin for tomorrow's meal."
"Very good, My Lady.And at that command the young man returned to Bhante Udayin and said: "May Bhante Udayin accept a token of gratitude[2] as our teacher; may he accept tomorrow's meal from the Nobel Lady of the Verahaccani clan."
And Bhante Udayin accepted silently.[3]
Then Bhante Udayin, rising up in the early pre-dawn, attending to bowl and robes, set out and eventually arrived at the residence of the Nobel Lady of the Verahaccani clan, where he sat down on a "seat-made-ready".[4]
Then the Nobel Lady served Bhante Udayin with excellent food, both solid and liquid, with her own hand, until he had had his fill. And when she perceived that he had finished his meal by the fact that he had withdrawn his hand from the bowl and had given it a rinse with water supplied (hand-out bowl clean'tup), she sat down on a high seat without removing her sandals, and with her head covered with a veil, and said: "Teach me Dhamma, Beggar."
But at that[5], Beggar Udayin, said: "There will be a time for that, sister." and got up from his seat and left without saying a further word.
Well, this circumstance repeated itself a second time -- from the visit of the young man to the departure of Beggar Udayin -- and was well into it's third repetition when the Nobel Lady spoke up:
"Young Man, although you have been singing the praises of Bhante Udayin, whenever I have said: "Teach me, Dhamma, Beggar," he just says: "There will be a time for that, sister," and gets up and departs without saying a further word."
"But My Lady, were you not wearing your sandals? Did you not sit on a high seat? Did you not cover your head with a veil? And did you not say: 'Teach me Dhamma, Beggar.'? The Dhamma is greatly honored by these Aristocrats, my lady. They have great respect for the Dhamma."
"Very well, young man. Will you please invite the Beggar Udayin, in my name, to tomorrow's meal?"
"Very good, My Lady" replied the young man who then set out and did just that. And things transpired as before except that, at the end of the meal, the Nobel Lady of the Verhaccani clan removed her sandals, took a low seat, removed the veil from her head, and asked: "If it please, Bhante, under what circumstances are the Arahants able to point to the existence of good and evil? Under what circumstances are the Arahants not able to point to the existence of good and evil?"[6]
"Where there is the Eye, sister, Arahants are able to point to the existence of good and evil. Where there is no eye, Arahants cannot point to the existence of good and evil.
Where there is the Ear, sister, Arahants are able to point to the desistance of good and evil. Where there is no Ear, Arahants cannot point to the existence of good and evil.
Where there is the Nose, sister, Arahants are able to point to the existence of good and evil. Where there is no Nose, Arahants cannot point to the existence of good and evil.
Where there is the Tongue, sister, Arahants are able to point to the existence of good and evil. Where there is no Tongue, Arahants cannot point to the existence of good and evil.
Where there is Body, sister, Arahants are able to point to the existence of good and evil. Where there is no Body, Arahants cannot point to the existence of good and evil.
Where there is Mind, sister, Arahants are able to point to the existence of good and evil. Where there is no Mind, Arahants cannot point to the existence of good and evil."
At that, the Nobel Lady of the Verhaccani clan said: "Most Excellent, sir! Most Excellent Indeed! In the same way as one who sets upright that which had been upside down, or points out what had been hidden, or shows the way to one who is lost, or brings a light into the darkness so that anyone with eyes in their head that can see can see the objects there -- in so many ways has the Arahant Udayin set out The Dhamma. I, myself, Teacher Udayin, go to the Lucky Man for refuge; I, myself, Teacher Udayin, go to the Dhamma for refuge; I, myself, Teacher Udayin, go to the Order for refuge! Let the Arahant[6a] Udayin look on me as a lay disciple who, from this day forth as long as this life shall last, has gone for refuge to the Buddha, The Dhamma, and the Sangha."
The following are not "Rules"; they are ways of showing respect, or of avoiding showing disrespect. You will find that you will hear more dhamma if you ad-here to these behaviors:
Keep your Dhamma Books on the top shelf. (or on a special shelf at the highest location possible in a room).
Do not sit directly in front of a Bhikkhu (con-frontation)
Do not sit in a seat that is higher than that used by the Bhikkhu
Do not wear anything on your head when you listen to Dhamma
Do not wear anything on the feet when you listen to Dhamma...but do not face the soles of the feet towards the Bhikkhu (i.e., sit cross-leg style, so the soles of the feet face upward or inward)
Greet a Beggar with the term "Bhante" (It is a contraction of the term Bhadante = "Broke Tooth, discussed elsewhere, having come down through time to mean "Elder," Venerated One.")
Women should not touch a Bhikkhu, even to shake hands. (Men should not really be touching a Bhikkhu either, but now and again, in an extraordinary show of respect and veneration it is permissible to stroke the feet of a bhikkhu, or to wash his feet if he has just arrived after a long journey). In one of many compromises to our differing customs made by Bhikkhus here in the US, Bhikkhus often now shake hands with women. This is their decision; from our side we should strive to understand the basic idea: touch is a sense stimulus and we should not be making the abandoning of sense stimulation difficult for anyone, but especially not for someone whose life is explicitly dedicated to that effort.
Take the opportunity to Give! Bring Food, Clothing, Medicine, or even provide shelter if possible. (One should not invite a Bhikkhu to spend the night "under the same roof" as womenfolk.)
Listen Up!
Spend time after, reflecting on what you have heard.
Ask questions.
By
Lung Tom (Tom Phelan)
Based on the Digha Nikaya 16, Mahaparinibbana Sutta
It is common custom in Southeast Asian countries to offer honor and respect to kings, warriors, and heroes by presenting flowers, burning incense, and candles at a statue, monument or other memorial site. It is also customary to do three five point prostrations. These are also done by Buddhists of these countries when honoring and respecting the Buddha.
These are honorable customs and as a westerner I was very impressed at the sight of the citizens of Chiang Rai honoring the ancient warrior king Manrai as mentioned above. Some citizens even brought little elephant statues to place at the memorial site.
Is this the way we honor, respect, and pay homage to the Buddha to the highest degree? As the Tathagata lie dying beneath two sal trees the Buddha told the way to offer the highest honor, respect, and homage after the death of the Tathagata. The Buddha said the best way to honor and respect the Tathagata was for monks, nuns, male and female lay followers to keep practicing the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma. So we Buddhists should all train ourselves to practice living our lives in accordance with the Dhamma, and keep practicing masterfully. Doing so offers the highest honor, respect, and paying homage to the Blessed One.
We should all remember the Buddha assigned no one to take the Enlightened Ones place after his death, but instead said he was leaving the Dhamma. When we see the Dhamma we see the Tathagata. At Beluva the Buddha said make the Dhamma your refuge. At Nadika the Tathagata said the wise[7] should comprehend the Dhamma each on his own. From this statement you can understand no guru is needed for your teacher; you need no other teacher.
This is prompted by a series of posts on another board which come from Western Buddhists concerning the outward form of respect to be shown modern day Bhikkhus and which were answered by Bhikkhus.
Both sides showed a huge lack of understanding of each other.
On the Western side, the objection was to using formal manners of respect towards Bhikkhus who have not managed to convince one of their personal respectability. The objection to showing respect in this case is misplaced.
Respect towards a bhikkhu is never to be regarded as respect towards the individual, it is always to be regarded as respect towards the bhikkhu's symbolic representation of the true Sangha: The Four Pairs of Very Powerful Individuals. This is true even for the accomplished Bhikkhu even to the level of Arahant as these individuals have "Become Dhamma" and no longer are classifiable by their former identities. Paying true respect is, at heart, a matter for the individual to decide, but the outward form should be observed as long as one is undecided about this Dhamma; this is a matter of polite behavior even in this barbarian West of ours; but it also comes under the heading of covering your bets...Once one is convinced of the Dhamma, the respect should be that which one would give to the most awe inspiring individual imaginable; one who has solved the most difficult problem of all and who has saved one from incalculable suffering. Even we ignorant Westerners stand when we are told to do so in a court of law when a mere civil judge enters and leaves the room, some of us still stand when a lady enters the room. Will your mind tolerate having given less respect to someone who saves your ass?
The other side of this coin is the fact that disrespect towards the Bhikkhu is disrespect towards this Sangha, and this is very bad medicine indeed. What you have in those real members of the Sangha is a group of hugely powerful sorcerers. And Arahantship should not be mistaken for the usual way "death" is thought about, that is, that these individuals are not aware of absolutely everything that is going on with regard to the Sangha even today. Disrespect for such a one is absolutely like mic-spitting in the wind or holding a torch against the wind.
On the other side, there is no question that there are bhikkhus, if not a majority of Bhikkhus today who bear no resemblance to members of the true Sangha and whose demand for respect makes them appear ridiculous. This is their own problem and westerners should make strenuous effort to avoid criticism of these individuals (which is not to say that issues cannot be discussed!) because their shield, the yellow robes, while being their own noose, is an effective shield that will only result in injury to one who attacks it mistaking the individual for the Sangha.
As for the Eastern side: I have not seen ever, in all my years of reading even one thorough description of the manners of greeting and customs of respect to be shown a bhikkhu.
The Bhikkhu who objects to being treated with less than the respect to which he has become accustomed would be better off, it seems to me, to be educating the Western student of the Dhamma rather than to be belittling him. Educate, do not castigate.
A huge ruckus I just observed on another board could have been avoided simply by the explanation of the symbolic nature of respect towards Bhikkhus, but instead the Westerners were belittled for their ignorance of custom.
There is no question that the bigger fault is on the shoulders of the one with the knowledge for berating the ignorant for ignorance rather than practicing tolerance and educating. More than likely tolerance and education were overlooked because ignorance was not missing from the side so easily taking offence at injured pride. A more enlightened attitude would have been reflected in pity on the ignorant for the grief they were causing themselves by their disrespect.
Again, as I said, I have never seen a formal list of the manners and customs to be used when addressing and dealing with Bhikkhus. I would welcome such, but in the meanwhile I'll list here what I have gathered:
When speaking directly to a Bhikkhu, one may address him as "Bhante" (e.g. Bhante? What do you say to this...); or as Venerable Sir (e.g., Venerable Sir, What do you say...), or as Venerable So and So (e.g., Venerable So and So, what do you say about);
When speaking of a Bhikkhu or introducing him to another, one should attempt to find out the terms usually used for this individual Bhikkhu, because the terms vary:
Venerable So and So; Bhikkhu So and So, MahaThera; etc
Deeper than that:
It is polite to ask permission to ask a question rather than simply asking a question. This is the case in person. On the Internet I believe we can say that there are grounds for saying that Internet Etiquette supercedes to some degree...here, for example, in order not to fruitlessly waste bandwidth one might ask a question of a Bhikkhu by saying: Bhante So and So, may I ask you about such and such.
Many of the more subtle rules of politeness have to do with Dhamma itself and are not mere formalities:
When one has asked a question, one should not argue or debate the answer. The reason for this is that argument and counter argument are, as the word indicates, expressions of anger, not efforts at understanding. They reflect thinking out loud. (This is, I realize, something that the Western student will find completely contrary to the way he has been taught to learn.) One has asked someone one believes knows the answer to a question, for his answer. He has provided his answer. To go further is to attempt to change the mind of the person one has just previously gone to for the answer to something one is saying, by way of the question, that one does not understand. To then turn around and attempt to teach the teacher is to suggest that the reason for the initial appraoch was not to find out something, but to argue and convince the other where the other has not asked to be educated. Forcing one's knowledge on others is not the Pali way.
If you think a person is teaching wrong dhamma, teach right dhamma straight out.
If you think you can teach the other individual by way of asking a question and if the question has been, to your way of thinking, incorrectly answered, direct confrontation is not the way to respond. One should ask further questions until the individual has been brought face to face with his incorrect answer. Then the question may be asked: "Here you said such and such, but there you said so and so, which is it?"
Otherwise one should be sitting waiting to be asked, (or at the most aggressive, siezing opportunity that presents itself) not going round hunting up people to confront with one's great wisdom. This is a wrong approach I can testify from personal experience is a painful, frustrating waste of time.
But this is a level of sophistication in dialog I do not see being exercised anywhere in person or on the net, by laymen or by bhikkus.
[1]Sanyutta Nikaya, Part IV, Salayatana group #133 (10). Verahaccani
[1a]For Udayi's method, see: Udayi
[2]Buddhist teachers do not accept money for teaching the dhamma; but as it was a tradition at the time in other systems to pay a "teacher's fee", now and again in the Suttas you will hear about a "teacher's fee" being offered and accepted, sometimes with an artificial circumvention of the practice of not accepting fees, sometimes, as here, without raising the issue . . . most likely because of the nature of the "fee" (that is, Food). For more on the issue of accepting money for teaching, see: He Handles Gold and Silver)
[3]The usual translation: "accepted by his silence"; is unrealistic. Depending on the perception of the giver and the power of the acceptor there will have been a "silent communication" of some sort...from a nod of acceptance to an indication of no objection.
[4]Such a "seat-made-ready" in the home of a householder would have been prepared in anticipation of this event; it is a Beggar's habit to prepare an empty seat in any location where he is likely to reside for a while (even just for the afternoon's sit-down session) -- this in anticipation of the arrival of a guest or even, perhaps, a visit from The Master. This seat, also, is known as a "seat-made-ready".
[5]I am sure completely emotionally indifferent, perceiving the best method to raise up the Nobel Lady.
[6]I hear this in my usual way. The text casts this in the formula way, clearly indicating the Four Truths: "There being what, does good and evil exist; without what does good and evil not exist?" I hear the Lady asking in much more confused language -- although a sophisticated question, no doubt!
[6a]Who sees how she knew? Because when asked "How do Arahants point to good and evil", Udiyi does not say he does not know, but without hesitation answers which would make him either a fool (for speaking about something he knows nothing about) or an Arahant; and the wisdom of his answer shows he is no fool.
[7]A person who understands the wholesome from the unwholesome is considered wise.
References:
PTS: The Book of the Kindred Sayings, Kindred Sayings on Sense, pp 77
Contact:
Privacy Statement Copyright Statement Webmaster's Page
Page Last Updated
Friday, December 26, 2003 12:01 PM
