I did an interview with one of my teachers not too long who said something interesting, he was a monk from a pretty early age, 16 or something I think.. and has been a layperson for a number of years now. Paraphrasing here- he said that being a monk is not necessarily the more efficient path for all everyone, because the lifestyle is so intentionally limited, and there is so much less going on..it's actually less to work with for some folks. Whereas a layperson that can effectively practice the Dharma in the midst of chaos and actually apply it could be on the fast track. Obviously he is pro-monastic, but I thought it was interesting because he mentioned it pretty specifically in a part of the conversation that was about his take on these subjects. I'm all for monastics..I just don't think it's reasonable to dismiss laypeople as being "lesser" or irrelevant due to the usual issues.
Last edited by Johnny Dangerous
on Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Just as a lotus does not grow out of a well-levelled soil but from the mire, in the same way the awakening mind
is not born in the hearts of disciples in whom the moisture of attachment has dried up. It grows instead in the hearts of ordinary sentient beings who possess in full the fetters of bondage." -Se Chilbu Choki Gyaltsen