Should One Honour Shameless and Immoral
Monks?
“If a person, knowing a monk to be shameless or
immoral, offers the four requisites, does this amount to the
blessing that says that one should honour worthy persons? Or
does it contradict this advice? Kindly let us know the good
or bad results with suitable evidence and case
histories.”
First one should know the persons worthy of honour as
mentioned in the Suttanipāta Commentary. They are 1) the
Omniscient Buddha, 2) a Pacceka Buddha, 3) a Noble Disciple,
4) one’s mother, 5) one’s father, 6) one’s elder brother, 7)
one’s elder sister, 8) the mother of one’s husband, 9) the
father of one’s husband, 10) the elder brother of one’s
husband, 11) the elder sister of one’s husband.
This commentary mentions only eleven types who are
worthy of honour and respect. The commentary on the
Dakkhinavibhanga Sutta further mentions that, for householders
who take refuge in the Three Gems, novices, monks, and Noble
Ones are worthy of honour and respect. In classifying persons
who are worthy of honour we should therefore include the
following: 12) an ordinary householder who accepts the three
refuges, 13) an ordinary householder who maintains the five
precepts, 14) an ordinary novice, 15) an ordinary monk. Thus,
fifteen types of worthy persons can be found.
For ordinary novices and monks we can define three
further classes: scrupulous (lajjī), shameless (alajjī), and
immoral (dussīlo).
Offering almsfood and other requisites to scrupulous
novices and monks amounts to the good practice enjoined in the
Mangala Sutta as “honouring those worthy of honour.” One may
doubt whether offerings to shameless or immoral novices and
monks fulfil the Mangala Dhamma or not. The answer is that
offerings to shameless novices and monks do amount to
honouring those worthy of honour. The only problem to consider
is whether we can classify offerings to immoral novices and
monks as an auspicious deed. Many lay supporters find
themselves in perplexity here. So I should give the answer in
detail for clarification and guidance.
In the Visuddhimagga (Vism. 46) it says that every
monk, once ordained, bears the burden of more than nine
billion Vinaya rules. In the five Vinaya books explaining the
Pātimokkha samvara sila, the Omniscient Buddha proclaimed
innumerable rules for all monks. So every monk in this
dispensation undertakes innumerable precepts and training
rules, which he must learn and follow. Once the three refuges
and kammavācā recitations have been completed, every monk has
accepted the innumerable rules of basic monastic restraint
(Pātimokkha samvara sīla).
The Omniscient Buddha’s power of making Vinaya rules
and regulations for all monks is based on “Ānadesanā” — his
authority or command. So once a layman receives the robes from
his preceptor, he automatically transcends a layman’s status
and instantly becomes a homeless one. Even at the initial
stage of ordination, a candidate is worthy to receive homage
and alms from lay donors. This is due to the status received
from the mandatory law of the Vinaya. Lay people should show
their respect by bowing, though the candidate has not yet
undertaken the novice rules and regulations. At the third
round of reciting the Three Refuges he automatically
undertakes the novice rules and regulations. Then he is a real
novice and needs no further taking of precepts as he has
undertaken them automatically after the completion of the
ordination procedure.
If this fully ordained novice breaks one of ten main rules,1 he destroys the status of the Three
Refuges, thereby forsaking all rules of one gone forth. What
remains are the asking and taking of the robe, so he has not
yet reverted to the status of a layman. He is still a novice
according to the Vinaya. However, he is not a true novice of
the type mentioned above as he lacks the training rules. If,
however, he takes the Three Refuges from the Sangha again, he
undertakes the training rules again. Only if he fails to take
the Three Refuges from the Sangha can he be classified as
immoral, since he falsely claims to be a novice. If he does
not take the Three Refuges again, he is an immoral, fallen
novice. If he admits his faults, he is not classified as
immoral, and he becomes a layman by this act.
Many lay people think that if a novice breaks one of
the ten main rules he automatically becomes a layman. This is
wrong. If the act of taking up the robes is retained, he
cannot be classified as a layman. The matter of disrobing for
the transgression is not the responsibility of the preceptors
or teachers. The decision rests with the novice concerned.
What preceptors and teachers can do is to expel an immoral
novice from the Buddha’s dispensation. These explanations are
in accordance with the Vinaya text2 and decisions in the commentaries. This
explains the nature of an immoral novice.
Besides the ten main disciplines, a novice has to
observe ten punishments and seventy-five training rules, which
are classified as “offences” or “punishments.” So if a novice
transgresses one in this class, no failure of the Three
Refuges arises, there is no destruction of the precepts
either. What fault he gets here is the breaking of restraint
only. This type of offence can be cured by undergoing
punishment, after which he regains his purity of restraint as
before.
Innocent Until Proven Guilty
The principles of Vinaya are subtle. One must think
deeply on them before one can pass judgement on a novice or
monk.
Let us give an example. During the time of British
rule in Burma, the government conferred administrative powers
on Township Officers. These officers, after appointment, could
try particular cases, pass judgement according to specific
rules, and prescribe suitable punishments. If they committed
some offences themselves, these officers must, according to
government servant conduct rules, lose their offices, while
other offences resulted in suspension of duties only. These
latter offences could be cured by the payment of fines. The
nature of each office, its powers, types of offences and
appropriate punishments were published in the Civil Service
Act. According to this Act, a Township Officer automatically
assumed powers conferred by the Government at his appointment.
Regulations that would lead to his dismissal from office only
applied when he committed specific offences. When he was
dismissed, all his powers disappeared. Some misdeeds, however,
caused him to pay fines, but did not lead to his dismissal; so
he retained his office and still tried the cases of others.
The powers conferred when assuming office, remained intact,
though he himself suffered fine-paying punishment for some
wrongful acts. This example is to clarify the different types
of offences committed by a novice or monk.
In the Vinaya rules two main categories can be
seen.
1. Samādana sīla — One takes vows and makes a
determination to observe the numerous precepts. This is called
“undertaking morality.” It includes the rules undertaken
implicitly by performing the ordination ceremony.
2. Samvara sīla — The life of a novice or monk
carries a moral duty of restraint. This is called “morality of
restraint.” The restraint of the senses from sensuality is a
duty of voluntary moral endeavour.
Once a novice takes the three refuges in the proper
way, he automatically fulfils “undertaking morality” with this
formal act. However, “morality of restraint” needs the effort
to observe a precept when a chance to break it occurs. For
this type of morality, a novice must cultivate the confidence
and will to practise the teaching. Then he must refrain from
breaking a particular rule if a chance to break it
occurs.
As mentioned already, there are two types of
purification or punishment for a novice. If he breaks a rule
deserving expulsion, he automatically forsakes the Three
Refuges, and all precepts that he had undertaken are thereby
given up. Not a single training rule remains intact. If he
transgresses a rule that calls for punishment or purification,
he retains the virtue of taking the Three Refuges, and he
still observes the precepts. Even breaking of a precept in
this case does not destroy his undertaking. He retains the
novice’s precepts and status. He has only broken and defiled
his restraint, not his undertaking. So if he observes the
prescribed punishment for purification, his purity of
restraint is re-established.
In the case of a monk’s precepts, he receives them all
as soon as the fourth kammavācā recitation is completed in the
ordination hall. He automatically undertakes the monks’
precepts by following the ordination procedure. As for the
purity of restraint, it is the same as for a novice. He must
train himself in the morality of restraint.
If a monk breaks one of the four rules of defeat, all
the precepts he has undertaken are automatically lost. Not a
single precept or discipline remains with him. However, if he
breaks any rules other than those of defeat, he has only
broken and defiled his restraint of those particular rules —
his undertaking of the bhikkhus’ training remains intact. This
is the power of the Vinaya.
Thus a clear distinction must be made between breaking
his undertaking of the bhikkhus’ training, and the breaking of
his restraint. Only then can one clearly know whether a novice
or a monk is shameless or immoral. This is a fundamental
distinction according to the Vinaya.
Due to the establishment of the Vinaya by the command
of the Omniscient Buddha, a monk undertakes more than nine
billion precepts on completion of the ordination ceremony.
Even if he becomes shameless immediately, since he is still a
monk because of the remaining training rules, he is worthy of
respect and offerings from the laity. He is clearly an
honourable monk who can receive the worship and respect of the
laity.
To determine whether a monk becomes immoral, depraved,
and fallen, numerous points should be analysed. The rules in
this regard are very subtle. The Omniscient Buddha’s Vinaya
prohibitions and regulations are based on his incomparable
power and boundless compassion, so they are profound and
subtle. They are full of surprises too. Great is the nature
and scope of the Vinaya discipline, which is very
profound.
The Profundity of the Vinaya
How deep and subtle the Vinaya is can be understood
from the following examples. A lay person, even after
eradicating all mental defilements and becoming an Arahant,
has to pay respect to and worship an ordinary monk who still
has all the mental defilements. This is because a monk enjoys
that status by having followed the Vinaya procedure. An
ordinary monk must not bow to an Arahant lay person as his own
status is higher. The Arahant is still a lay person, while the
other is a monk. If the two are compared on the basis of
mental purity, this injunction seems unreasonable.
There is a vast difference between a lay Arahant and
an ordinary monk. The former has personally achieved nibbāna
so his heart is always pure, while the latter’s heart contains
many defilements, so he is not free from the suffering of the
lower realms. Yet a lay Arahant has to pay respect to a monk
who is just an ordinary person. In the matter of status in the
Buddha’s dispensation, an ordinary monk, being a member of the
Sangha, is nobler than an Arahant who is just a lay person.
Why does a lay Arahant have to worship an ordinary monk? It is
due to the Vinaya proclaimed with the supreme authority of the
Omniscient Buddha. One can therefore realise that the power of
Vinaya is imponderable and boundless in scope and extent. The
Buddha’s supreme power, immeasurable wholesome kamma, and
omniscience manifest themselves in laying down these unique
Vinaya rules. They have effects for every monk in the Buddha’s
dispensation.
Another case should be mentioned in this connection. A
junior monk by one hour [or one minute] must show respect to a
senior. A junior monk who is an Arahant must pay respect to
and worship a senior monk, who is still just an ordinary
person. However senior she may be, an Arahant nun must worship
a monk who is an ordinary person. Thus a Noble One of sixty
rains must revere an ordinary monk. Why? These disciplines and
modes of conduct are proclaimed by the Omniscient Buddha with
his full authority, which is incomparable. They are known as
“ānāpaññatti” — rules made by the supreme authority and
boundless compassion of the Buddha.
This power that prevails in the Vinaya, and all other
Dhamma powers of the Buddha are unique. The Vinaya and Dhamma
take the place of the Buddha after his demise, as he declared
in the Mahāparinibbāna Sutta: “Ānanda, after I pass away the
Dhamma and Vinaya I have proclaimed and prescribed will be
your teachers.”
These prophetic words of the Buddha are profound, and
their scope is boundless. So each of the millions of precepts
undertaken by a monk during his ordination represents the
Buddha himself. The prophetic words of the Buddha dwell in an
ordained monk, whoever he may be.
A bhikkhu in this dispensation means a fully ordained
monk who has fulfilled five factors: purity of the ordination
procedure, purity of the group of monks, purity of the four
formal recitations of kammavaca, purity of robes and bowl, and
being a qualified candidate for full ordination. Once the
ceremonies of taking the three refuges and formal recitations
have been done, he instantly receives and undertakes the
precepts. So we can say that nine billion Buddhas dwell in his
person by the power of the Buddha and efficacy of the Vinaya.
He is like a pagoda where the Buddha’s relics are
enshrined.
Everyone should know that a pagoda, even if it is made
of mud or sand, is a sacred object of worship because the
Buddha’s relics are enshrined there. Due respect must be paid
to the relics enshrined therein, which represent the Buddha,
even if the pagoda is made of unworthy materials. If
disrespect is shown even to this type of pagoda, one
accumulates unwholesome kamma.
Even if the precincts of a pagoda are littered with
dust, garbage, excrement, etc., the pagoda itself remains
worthy of deep respect. So everyone should bow their heads in
showing due respect to the relics, which are certainly worthy
of honour. If one shows disrespect on seeing a pagoda with all
sorts of rubbish nearby, one accumulates unwholesome
kamma.
Similarly, an ordinary monk possesses millions of
Buddhas in his person, though his mind is littered with
thousands of mental defilements, like garbage near a pagoda.
As long as a single Vinaya precept still exists in his person,
he is entitled to be worshipped by a lay Arahant. The
innumerable Vinaya precepts that exist in his person represent
countless Buddhas. Though he is not free from Vinaya faults,
he is like a pagoda. So a lay Arahant must revere him for this
reason.
If devotees consider this matter carefully, they will
realise the countless Vinaya rules observed by an ordinary
monk. Moreover, they will appreciate and revere the power of
the Buddha, who is fully entitled to proclaim Vinaya rules and
regulations, and appropriate procedures for their
purification. The commanding power of the Omniscient Buddha
shows its greatest effects in the Sangha established by him.
The power of the Vinaya is very profound, and is hard to
understand by an ordinary devotee or uneducated layman. No one
can fully fathom the significance of the Vinaya’s
power.
Those laymen who have not yet realised nibbāna, should
examine themselves to appreciate their own characteristics and
status. If they reflect wisely they will willingly pay due
respects to monks, even if they are shameless. All monks
ordained properly in the Sangha under the authority of the
Omniscient Buddha are entitled to receive worship and respect
from the laity. So an intelligent layman will pay respect,
give almsfood, and show deference, even to a shameless monk.
As always, vigilance is essential for the profundity of the
Buddha’s rules and their wide-ranging effects to be
realised.
Even in an immoral monk, part of the Vinaya’s power
and its effects still exist, though he has destroyed his
undertaking of the precepts by committing an offence of
defeat. If a scrupulous monk accuses him of defeat without
proof, or at least circumstantial evidence, it is just like
accusing an innocent monk. So one who accuses an immoral monk
falls into a serious offence requiring a formal meeting of the
Sangha. The Vinaya text and its commentary explain this in
detail.
Considering these facts in the Vinaya Pitaka, one
should appreciate the Vinaya’s power that still prevails in an
immoral monk. Therefore, in dealing with an immoral monk, one
must consider only the power of the Vinaya, focusing on the
ordination procedure he has undergone. If these facts and
powers of the Vinaya are known and understood, a lay person
will be able to obtain the auspicious blessing of honouring
the worthy as taught in the Mangala Sutta. One should focus
one’s mind only on the marvellous power and significance of
the Vinaya that prevails among the monks, even in the person
of an immoral monk.
This is correct. An immoral monk still retains the
powerful influences of the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha even
after his downfall. So these three sacred authorities become
objects of worship in an immoral monk. Devotees should
concentrate on these worthy things only. This proper
relationship between the laity and monks accords with other
teachings of the Buddha. Therein he exhorts the laity to
honour the Dhamma by revering the wise, intelligent, and
learned monks as they represent the knowledge of Dhamma,
though they may lack some purity in their conduct. So a wise
devotee objectively focuses his mind only on the monk’s
learning and nothing else.
The case of lay people who do not know that a monk is
immoral is interesting. Thinking him to be a scrupulous monk,
they offer almsfood and pay him sincere respect. The object of
their worship and respect is morality, yet this monk has no
morality whatsoever. In this case they obtain suitable merits
for their respectful attitude and reverential acts, though the
monk, being without morality, cannot symbolise a scrupulous
monk at all. So there is no “receiver”, as it were. Even in
this case one should not hastily judge such offerings and
respect as totally useless.
The reasons for this caution can be known from ancient
precedents, like the case of King Saddhātissa in ancient Sri
Lanka. Cases like this provide guidance for good deeds by the
laity.
The Wisdom of King Saddhātissa
Once, King Saddhātissa, knowing a monk to be
shameless, controlled his mind and reformed his attitude to
perform the act of reverence to this shameless monk. One day
he went round the royal city sitting on his elephant. It
happened that a shameless monk was fishing in the royal pond
when the king and his retinue arrived at that place. As soon
as he saw the royal procession, he dropped his hook and line,
came up to the bank and sat quietly under a tree. Seeing this
behaviour, the king wanted to offer almsfood to the shameless
monk. On returning to his palace, before taking his meal, he
ordered fine food to be sent to the shameless monk, because he
remembered the changed behaviour at the time of his
encounter.
When the ministers arrived near the pond to offer the
royal food, the shameless monk was fishing again. As soon as
the king and his retinue had left, he resumed his fishing.
Seeing this, the ministers’ devotion and confidence
disappeared. As they saw this evil behaviour in the first
place they did not want to offer the almsfood. Knowing that
the ministers had seen him, the monk instantly dropped his
hook and line and sat quietly under a tree. The ministers had
seen that he was shameless and so did not offer the royal
almsfood to him. They returned to the palace and reported the
matter to the king. The king asked whether they had offered
the royal almsfood, they replied that they did not do so as
the monk was shameless.
Then the king questioned them about the behaviour of
the shameless monk when he saw them approaching. The ministers
replied that he instantly dropped his fishing tackle and sat
quietly under a tree. The king remarked that the monk had
forsaken his shameless behaviour and shown moral shame and
dread at that time. These great virtues, moral shame and
dread, are two of the seven states possessed by all good
persons, and are treasured by the wise. The king asked the
ministers the cost of a royal breakfast. After the ministers
reported the cost of the food, he said that moral shame,
dread, and remorse were more valuable, and were worthy of
respect as they were true riches within the heart. He again
ordered them to offer the royal food to the shameless monk in
view of these essential good factors found in him at one time
or another. The ministers then offered the royal food with due
respect and honour. They had changed their
attitude.
King Saddhātissa, being intelligent and wise,
possessed the powers of confidence and wisdom, so he could
show respect even to a shameless monk. Somehow he sought and
found a few virtues in a shameless monk and his mind was
focused on these select noble states, which he revered. By
instantly showing shame and dread this shameless monk showed
the characteristics of a good monk, thus becoming worthy to
receive the royal almsfood. Although the recipient was
shameless, the noble attitude and concentration on a few noble
virtues raised the king’s offering in status to the blessing
of honouring the worthy. The king’s wholesome attitude was a
great blessing. Seeking virtues even in a shameless monk he
follows this injunction from the Mangala
Sutta. | 
