What is Considered Materialistic for Buddhist Monk?
This is a spin-off from this post, since it’s a new topic of discussion; let us start with a new topic heading to avoid confusion. Starting with Lao Buddhist comment:
“Is a Buddhist monk who buys a $100,000 car more materialistic than a monk who owns one in another way?
I want to attack the issues, not the person(s) I have a discussion with. I want to know what other people think as much as or more than what I believe, that was why I raised some questions in my previous posts. I also want to know their reasons.”
Updated 5/22/2008: In addition, this is where Lao Buddhist stands as to how a Lao Buddhist temple should be run.
“Lao Buddhist temple/organization should be run like other non-profit organizations by having board of directors and executive officers. The most important part is the involvement of the Lao people in the community. Many Lao organizations in my State looked good only at the beginning. There is a Lao saying “Houa xang, harng noo” (elephant’s head, mice’s tail). It seemed like the people just went with the crowd without their own strong will. When a dictatorship (or hindrance) appears in a Lao organization most of the Lao people just shy away which is, in some cases, what the dictator wants.
Based on my own experience, the majority of the Lao people who are 50 or older go to a temple just to worship.
You’re right about I’m doing “some sort of research”. I would like to know how the Lao people think about the future of our temples in the US and how many people are working hard try to solve the problems. I believe the future of most of the Lao Buddhist temples in the US is in jeopardy. The bigger they are, the harder and louder they would fall. I’m wondering if the LBMA is trying to save Lao Buddhist Temples in the US.
Based on my own experience, the majority of the Lao people who are 50 or older go to a temple just to worship.”
Then my comment to Lao Buddhist, which was rephrased back, I’m assuming as a statement or question:
“throwing information around without informing as to why or how could be very misleading to readers, as for your statement of “In China, a Buddhist monk owns a $125,000 car.” I assumed you are referring to a gift that was given to him, an article here: “So, should the abbot of the Shaolin Temple accept a luxury sports car valued at $125,000 dollars? The local government gave him the car as a reward for boosting tourism.” From reading your statement, most readers would think that monks are so materialistic nowadays that they buy and own luxury vehicles”
Full Article below August 24, 2006:
Should monks accept gifts?
China’s most famous kung fu monk is the center of a hot debate on the Internet. Chinese Web surfers are debating whether it’s OK for monks from the famed Shaolin Temple that’s inspired many martial arts movies to live in luxury.
LISA NAPOLI: An ethical debate’s brewing online in China. It has to do with the nation’s most famous kung fu monk and cash. Marketplace’s Jocelyn Ford reports.
JOCELYN FORD: Monks from Shaolin Temple are known for their austere lifestyle and hard training.
So, should the abbot of the Shaolin Temple accept a luxury sports car valued at $125,000 dollars? The local government gave him the car as a reward for boosting tourism.
A majority of Netizens say the gift is not appropriate for a spiritual leader.
Other religious figures are also under fire. Monk Tenzin is a Tibetan Buddhist from China’s far west. He says tourism and donations from ethnic Chinese believers have brought riches to many Tibetan monasteries.
MONK TENZIN: Monks will spend their time on enjoyment, like nice house and fancy life, like a car, maybe cell phone maybe . . .”
He believes many monks fail to find a balance between spirituality and worldliness, but he says some monasteries are also using the extra income for good deeds, like building schools and orphanages.
Even Buddhist monks fall prey to the seductions of life.
I think expensive fancy car of $100,000 or over is an obvious sign of materialistic, even for normal people, then it is even more obvious for monks. In a situation of expensive gift such as $125,000 car, I feel that it’s inappropriate for the donor to give, and the receiver being monk to receive because of the vow that he took when entered into monkshood. But materialistic is different from person to person. Take for instance the record keeping of a company, some company will capitalize $50 phone as Furniture and Fixtures (Assets), but others might think it’s not material and charged to Office Expense, there is no set guideline, some company would consider anything over $500, $1,000, or even $5,000 as material. As for me, I think fancy Luxury car gives me the feeling of being wasteful and that vehicle is a transportation that would get me from point A to point B, and if it’s reliable, then it should be sufficient enough. I kind of feel like this guideline would be appropriate for monks as well.
I think the issue with monks being materialistic might be the way that they assimilate into the modern world, very much like most of us, but when monks do it, then it makes us frowned because it’s something that we were not used to seeing. Take for instance, the monks at Wat Lao Buddhavong of VA (I often think of them as the rich Wat), monks ‘chun’ eat their meals at a dining room table, most of us might have seen in YouTube or photos, this might be for convenience purpose, but I have a hard time viewing this as a normal behavior for monks. I think it’s okay for Wat to have 1 cell phone (incase when they are out and about and need to be reached) and a main computer in a central location (for e-mail communication or doing research), but when individual monk has cell phone so he can text messages his friends (especially female) then I think it’s very inappropriate, then when he has a personal computer in his room (monk don’t share bedroom) so he can surf the Internet, then again I think it becomes an issue of being too materialistic (all example that I’m using here is from an actual monk, but I will not mention name)
“(all example that I’m using here is from an actual monk, but I will not mention name)”
“Lao monks having cash account of $xxx,xxx.00” without having proof or backup is an accusation, and if it is a fact, then not all monks have that, and a statement such as yours will help jeopardize the future of Lao Buddhist Wat even more. It’s a good idea to backup your statement, if you have none, then it becomes an accusation. “
Lao Buddhist,
I don’t understand your reply with a quote from another reply. I can’t read your mind or understand your intention with a reply like that.
Can you help me out by writing it down please.
IMO…..
Monks can and they do accept gifts but whether they will keep it or not it a different story. Going back to the car, the article mention about some person giving the monk a car. It didn’t mention if the monk kept the car and driving it around . The gift (car) might me inappropriate for a monk but it doesn’t mean it is wrong. A gift is a gift. The monk have a choice to keep it or give it someone else.
Ginger,
At my temple, I saw 3 different monks using their cell phone on different occasion inside the Sala when other monk is talking or telling story. The old people there especially the old men they done the same thing too. I really don’t like that. Cross talk is so annoying. I think personal cellphone for a monk would be a luxury item just like having a fridge, a tv, or computer in their own room.
I guess that is why I am drawn to the Therevada monks in the Forest Tradition such as the students of Ajahn Chah.
Have you seen this video. I bought a DVD of it. My kids love watching it. They ask me to play it all the time. It have an effect on my son so much. He even made a project on Buddha. I show it to my Mother. She was very skeptic about Western monks. After watching it she said that how monk should be like.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frY6H_jybDA
http://www.fearlessmountainfilm.com/
So this is the style of discussion that Lao Buddhist was talking about, very interest. The attack of
Nye Ginger, I mean the ISSUE has begun, anyone want to join him?Ginger,
Like you, “I’m not a mind reader”. Your words sound like criticizing me of misleading readers. “throwing information around without informing as to why or how could be very misleading to readers, as for your statement of “In China, a Buddhist monk owns a $125,000 car.” I assumed you are referring to a gift that was given to him, an article here: “So, should the abbot of the Shaolin Temple accept a luxury sports car valued at $125,000 dollars? The local government gave him the car as a reward for boosting tourism.” From reading your statement, most readers would think that monks are so materialistic nowadays that they buy and own luxury vehicles.” Please correct me if I misjudged your post.
_____________________________
“From reading your statement, most readers would think that monks are so materialistic nowadays that they buy and own luxury vehicles”. So I raised another question “Is a Buddhist monk who buys a $100,000 car more materialistic than a monk who owns one in another way?
This in one of my styles of discussion: put one in his/her own shoes, in another, echo my counterpart’s words.
________________________
In regard to the governing body of a temple, I referred to Dallas’ latest post under the other topic. I never said “all” temples are…. I asked him to ask leaders of his local temples and hopefully we would be able to learn from that temple if it has been administrated properly. Having BOD & executive officers sometimes is only on paper. If one is interested in the matters, one should ask and attend their regular meetings once a while and spread the good words from the meetings.
I’m looking and asking but not trying to prove…
_________________________
Dallas, I know that you’re not a mind reader. All you have to do is ask.
If you have time, of course.
Let’s take a look at these posts:
“(all example that I’m using here is from an actual monk, but I will not mention name)” It’s acceptable to this poster to not mention his backup.
“without having proof or backup is an accusation, and if it is a fact, then not all monks have that, and a statement such as yours will help jeopardize the future of Lao Buddhist Wat even more. It’s a good idea to backup your statement, if you have none, then it becomes an accusation. “ It became an accusation and “jeopardize the future of Lao Buddhist Wat even more” when this poster did not provide backup.
Correction/Clarification
“without having proof or backup is an accusation, and if it is a fact, then not all monks have that, and a statement such as yours will help jeopardize the future of Lao Buddhist Wat even more. It’s a good idea to backup your statement, if you have none, then it becomes an accusation. “ It became an accusation and “jeopardize the future of Lao Buddhist Wat even more” when another poster did not provide backup.
Lao Buddhist, look at the topic of discussion, it is going to be ‘bashing all the way’, and any statement made by any of us will help jeopardize the future of Lao Buddhist Wat even more, regardless of having back/up or not, the main discussion is materialistic here, unless we think that it’s a good thing, and a positive step for the future of Buddhist monks to be materialistic, what I said in my comment WILL make Buddhism look bad and I’m well aware of that, if I name names, it will not make my point look any better or made me look any better, and that’s why I chose not to speak badly about our Buddhist Religion for most of my blogging about Buddhism in the past, but it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.
I do think in a discussion such as this, it’d be a good idea to clarify your position, copy and paste without explaining where you stand is considered mocking (this I’m not accusing, that’s how I feel you’re doing at the moment), if that’s your style then it doesn’t bother me one bit, I wrote it, I know what I wrote, you’re not telling me anything different. I criticized myself for even posting this topic. At the moment, you’re putting me on trial, but go on, proceed with your attack.
Ginger, before we go on & on…would you please be clarify this:
Do these words sound like criticizing me of misleading readers? “throwing information around without informing as to why or how could be very misleading to readers, as for your statement of “In China, a Buddhist monk owns a $125,000 car.” I assumed you are referring to a gift that was given to him, an article here: “So, should the abbot of the Shaolin Temple accept a luxury sports car valued at $125,000 dollars? The local government gave him the car as a reward for boosting tourism.” From reading your statement, most readers would think that monks are so materialistic nowadays that they buy and own luxury vehicles.”
Lao Buddhist wrote: Do these words sound like criticizing me of misleading readers?
Yes, I criticized you for not making your statement very clear; it appears that I might have bruised your ego. Some reader only read what you said and assumed the worst, most will not try to find out how things are, and people have very little time and spend only a few minute reading. This (and the previous post) are my posts (I didn’t write the whole posts) but since I posted them, it is my responsibility. Just like right now, I feel responsible for my post, for the content of my post, I would normally never write about topic such as this, it is not my style of writing (blogging). If you want to have an open discussion we can do that, but you should not be too sensitive about things, your style of pointing things out to me is nothing new, I’ve been attacked worse than this. If you become less deffensive, maybe others might express their opinion.
Ginger on May 21st, 2008 at 10:52 am
Lao Buddhist, I’m not criticizing you, but I don’t like to see misleading or one sided story.
Ginger on May 22nd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Yes, I criticized you for not making your statement very clear;
__________________________________
It’s not attacking. It’s not mocking. It’s called clarifying.
_________________________________
“Some reader only read what you said and assumed the worst”
From my own perspective, a monk who buys a $100,000 car does not seem to be more materialistic than a monk who gets it as a gift. I’m not sure which one is “worst” ???
Lao Buddhist, I was not criticizing you at first, if I was I would not have posted your issue, that first comment was made before this post, I didn’t know what to think of you but was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you want to discuss this topic, and reposted the whole topic so other can participate, and even start off with a comment of what I thought was answering your issue that you want to discuss, but it appears that you are obsessed to prove me wrong, instead of discussing your issue, now it’s ‘he said, she said’ and I’m not sure what to think of your intention, and yes, now I am criticizing you, might be because of your style of ‘clarify’, you asked, so I answered, I’m not going to lie to you about my feeling. Your style of ‘clarifying’ things is very confusing to me; I’m not following your logic here.
To all Lao readers,
I would like to ask you who care about the future of Lao Buddhism/temples in the US to search for information of your local temples and share it with others. Ask about the regular meetings of your temple leaders. Try to attend as much you can and share your opinions. Don’t be shy
Best regards
Kady Lai!
Lao Buddhist wrote: From my own perspective, a monk who buys a $100,000 car does not seem to be more materialistic than a monk who gets it as a gift. I’m not sure which one is “worst” ???
From my personal perspective, looking at the result, it is equally materialistic (same vehicle), but if you look at the intention, I think the monk that goes out and buys a $100,000 intends to want that luxury vehicle, therefore there is greed of materialist there is the way that I see it and it appears to me as being worse. The monk that decides to keep the gifted $100,000 vehicle also has greed, but people might be more forgiving since it was not his intention to go out and buy one. If I have to use an example of comparison, I would say first and second-degree murder, the first-degree murder charge would get a harsher punishment because the intention was there.
Whoah… Lao Bhuddist has one of the most confusing string of comments ever. Apparently, Lao Bhuddist gets uncomfortable after Ginger finds fault in his unclear comment about a Chinese monk having a $125,000 car. As seen here: http://i31.tinypic.com/text.gif Later, he posts a few confusing copies of Ginger’s comments without a response.
One of the reasons why many Laotians fail to build a successful temple is because most can’t take constructive criticism. When someone tries to help by pointing out the practical and the correct way to do things, many of those that hear the criticisms would get really nervous or defensive. They will begin to believe that the world is against them. They make comments that makes no sense. Finally, they tend to stop what they are doing. It’s almost the point of OCD. I might have a solution to this. Take a deep breath and relax. Tell your body that you are in control and that you want to be in control. Tell your body that if this ever happens again you will keep their advices in a notepad. Then you will ask friends and family whether the advices are any good toward your goals.
English is an amazing tool for communication when it follows its proven guidelines. This link shows the typical posting rules. http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Ginger,
And almost similar to this, the Burma government hands out TVs and DVD players (instead of food and medicine) to victims of the cyclone disaster.
Which is lesser of the two evil? I believe the one receiving isn’t materialistic at all if he exchanges the car for cash to help preserve the temple. The unlucky one is the government for allowing their exchange to happen. I mean, it looks bad to have a headline that says, “Monks receives $125,000 car as gift from its government.” We immediately think… they’ve pimp the Kung Fu Master.
Sim, I think it’s partly my fault, I’m being too direct…Tai Tai style I guess, I need to learn how to be nicer like Tai Vientiane. Also, I’m too protective of Buddhism to the point that my comments are very defensive as well, I’m surprised no one has point this out to me yet.
I notice it but I was afraid of the Tai Tai in you and especially a woman too. That is double trouble.
Yes, I’m staying out of this one for awhile, too sick and too weak to take on a battle, hehehe. Don’t want to get cross in the fire you know.
Dallas, don’t give people the wrong idea, I’m actually real nice.
But good thing that I don’t wear Sinh, I’ve seen some Tai Tai ladies when they get upset, they yank it up with one hand, and the other hand holding a butcher knife, gives me Goosebumps just thinking about it.