New buddhist looking for guidance?

Something which impede my own serious look into monastic life is the dedication to ritual. What if you do not have complete confidence in what you are chanting? What if you believe something contradictory to it? Do you have full confidence that all the rituals you perform are worthwhile and necessary? Does the monastic social pressure to perform the rituals deny any critical analysis of them?

 

Actually, I find this quite humorous. The "dedication to ritual" part, that is.

Far as the chanting goes, we are doing nothing more than memorizing various teachings of the Buddha in Pali. From what I have been using before being able to memorize it, it is in both Pali and English and we are given a Pali/English Dictionary. We are completely encouraged to learn translation as this is essential to what the Theravada call Theory. Theory to Theravada is learning both Pali and English so that we can translate accurately.

So essentially, chanting is nothing more than intonating in order to memorize. So far I have found nothing contradictory to any of the teachings of the Buddha, and learning it in Pali has given me a better idea on translation over other individuals translations.

What I find so humorous about it is that you really have no idea.

As far as the "rituals" being "worthwhile and necessary", everytime we chant we are doing nothing more than giving a teaching in Pali.

Thanks for showing an interest in what I had to say from a previous post.

HTML:

 

One thing I have noticed of chanting or singing is that we gain heightened oxygenation of the brain, as well as control of the mental faculty through the breath. Extending the exhalation has the physiological effect of relieving anxiety.

 

Well, thanks for finding so much humour in my post.

I think the problem is that I view any sort of chanting, regardless of what it is being chanted, as a religious ritual. Even though I am quite convinced it is not, it is difficult to not interpret it as a type of conditioning that is used in major religions. Neither having any serious experience in Buddhism or a major religion I admit my ignorance on this issue, however: chanting itself seems rather alien to me.

One more thing which irks me though: Is becoming a monk escapist? I'd love the simplicity of the monastic lifestyle: wake-up, meditate, chant, meditate, eat, meditate, tea, meditate, dhamma talk, meditate, sleep. But that lifestyle is being supported by the good-will of others. Is there no feelings of guilt when you think 'Why do I get to have this lifestyle and others must work, stress out and suffer? Why am I not doing that? Did I run away from the harshness of the real world?' Do you have to rationalize your dependence upon dana as that you're benefiting them somehow due to kamma / rebirth?

I hope you do not view these questions as any sort of attack. I'd love to boot it a Forest Sangha community here in Canada to practice meditative absorption indefinitely, but my anti-religion alarm goes off whenever I see any sort of submission to a fixed set of rules regarding belief.

 

You could entertain a dispassionate observance of the subject. Certainly any rules you see are the ones you call upon.

 

Chanting itself is not a ritual. What is being chanted is not a ritual. The ritual is doing the same thing in exactly the same way every time. Chanting is like reading a book, reading the page is not a ritual. Picking up the same book in exactly the same way, opening it in exactly the same way, laying it down to read in the same place every time, reading it, closing it the same way every time, and returning it to where it was resting before you began ... that's ritual.

Kneeling in front of a statue in exactly the same way, bowing exactly the same way in exactly the same manner in exactly the same time after bowing, chanting the same chants in exactly the same order with the same flexation, going through the same motions in exactly the same manner over and over ... that's ritual.

?

Becoming a monk is exactly what you want it to be. Doesn't mean everyone is going to have the same expectations you do. Oh sure, some will agree on some of the ideas, but the expectations will not be the same. Don't know about Mahayana, can't speak for them as their way of becoming a monk and staying a monk are different, yet they are still bound by rules, but Theravada monks have 227 rules that govern their conduct. One is not commanded or demanded to keep these rules. One keeps the rules because one does what is necessary to be governed by those rules, i.e., one does what one must do to be a monk if being a monk is what they want. One doesn't have to be a monk, and as such doesn't have to keep the rules. No one is going to force you to take rules if you don't want them. So, you get exactly what you want. You get to be a monk or not to be a monk. The choice is up to the one wanting to be a monk.

Problems arise when one carries their expectations with them. Not every temple abides by the same daily criteria like what you mentioned, "wake-up, meditate, chant, meditate, eat, meditate, tea, meditate, dhamma talk, meditate, sleep". Each temple is different. Some are lax, some are strict, some are so strict you can't even get a glass of water unless it has been offered to you by a lay person. It's not the "simplistic" lifestyle you have built your expectations around. Perhaps being a forest monk going on tudong the remainder of your years would be, but even that is fraught with its own kind of stress for one who is not accustomed to walking out amongst wild animals capable of killing and eating you without a care that you are human.

One doesn't need to be supported by the lay people, doesn't need to receive offerings from a lay person. It's not commanded or demanded of you. Most of the Southeast Asian people who do give dana, and this is the only group that I can speak for, do so for a reason. Not because the monks demand it, they don't. Not because they have to, they don't. Not because their religion demands it, it doesn't. They do it because they want to. They don't have to. Most do it because their children are monks and they want to continue feeding and clothing their children. Most do it because in order to overcome greed they give. Most do it out of respect for someone doing what they want to do but don't think they are able or "have what it takes" ... I hear that one a lot. Most say, "I can't do that," not because they have to work, or because they have a family, but they don't think they "have what it takes" to be a monk.

The choice is up to you. Living and dying ... that's up to you. Eat, not eat ... up to you. Take dependence on someone else, don't take dependence ... up to you. Be self-sufficient, or not ... up to you. Whether or not someone is being benefited ... not up to you, why should it be? ... up to the one who think's they are being benefited. Kamma is going to happen with or without you. But they can create good kamma whether they give the monk something, or whether they give to someone else. Doesn't matter. Your own kamma is going to happen everytime you look at something, listen to something, smell something, taste something, touch something, think something, say anything, or do anything. No one else is going to put an end to your kamma but you. No one else is going to put an end to anyone elses kamma but them.

Does a street person or homeless have to justify their begging for food or money because they think they are benefiting someone else because of kamma?

Theravada monks are beggers. Begging is what they do for food. As far as clothing go, we are instructed on what we need to gather to make our robes from, how to cut the material, how to sew it, and how to dye it. We're even instructed on how to make our own medicines ... something Im a bit reluctant to try at the moment.

Everytime a lay person asks me what I need I always say, "I want everything, but I need nothing."

Rebirth? Don't rightly know what rebirth has to do with it?

I don't view your questions as any sort. Hope you dont view my responses as such.

Far as the Forest community. As someone unfamiliar with what that kind of living, I HIGHLY recommend against it. Being a Forest monk requires a complete understanding of what one is getting oneself into. Also requires a complete understanding of the teachings of the Buddha. And most importantly ... having an understanding of something and carrying expectations about something are NOT the same thing ... do not carry expectations else you WILL be in for some disappointments. If you do carry expectations, try to limit them to wanting to be freed from Greed, Ill-will and Delusion.

Going for a Forest experience is comparable to never having learned to walk before you try to jump off a cliff to learn how to fly.

Rules in Buddhism are not geared for belief, are not designed for belief, are not intended to enforce belief. Rules are meant to curb ones appitite to habitual feelings, perceptions, ideas, awareness. Nothing more.

If understood correctly, one practices extinction of ignorance not religion. Practicing not to take the life of any living being is not religious. Practicing not to take what doesn't belong to you is not religious. Practicing not to engage in inappropriate sensual behavior is not religious. Practicing not to use false speech is not religious. And practicing not to take intoxicants is not religious. You just tell yourself your not going to do it, and with the right effort and mindfulness you dont do it. Nothing religious about that ... that is, unless you make a ritual out of it.

HTML: