Seishin wrote:That is my understanding as well Astus.
What also has not been mentioned is the fact that most temples are inherited by sons (usually not daughters but sometimes). Whilst in some cases that may work out, I can see how most cases that would be a bad thing. Especially if the sons resent their family "profession".
Gassho,
Seishin.
Jikan wrote:I'm trying to be polite by calling you Mr Cohen, Mr Cohen. I don't know what the proper mode of address for someone who is ordained in the Treeleaf tradition, on an internet forum. I offer my apologies for having abraded you.


jundo cohen wrote:
You may forget that, no matter the government's policies and intentions, these matters were actively debated by Buddhist intellectuals for a century or more and, ultimately, the Buddhist clergy "voted" on these policies ... not only within the administrative bodies of the various sects, but in their actual lifestyle choices to be married. Nobody that I am aware of was "forced" to marry, and it was all ultimately a matter of personal right and choice. With regard to Kuruma Takudo, for example ...
Gassho, Jundo
Jikan wrote:My apology to you before was in earnest, Ven. Jundo Cohen. Again, I would like to emphasize that I mean no disrespect to you nor to the lineage you represent.
just Jikan
Sherlock wrote:Japanese Buddhist "clergy" might well be good practitioners even married, but should then not be called bhiksus (or any translation thereof) since they don't follow the vinaya. The Sanskrit term guru or Tibetan lama should IMO be far more appropriate than "priest" in a Buddhist context -- one can be a married guru but not a married monk, which is a contradiction in any tradition, Buddhist or otherwise, which has monasticism.
I think the discussion about Buddhism in Japan in the past is a bit irrelevant, what is more important is the state of Buddhadharma in Japan currently and its prospects for long-term survival.
Matylda"What matters after all for me is the quality of teaching, quality of experience and realization. If it does not work then nothing really works. Regardless of celibacy, non-celibacy etc..[/quote]
[quote="Sherlock wrote:what is more important is the state of Buddhadharma in Japan currently and its prospects for long-term survival.
Sherlock wrote:Japanese Buddhist "clergy" might well be good practitioners even married, but should then not be called bhiksus (or any translation thereof) since they don't follow the vinaya. The Sanskrit term guru or Tibetan lama should IMO be far more appropriate than "priest" in a Buddhist context -- one can be a married guru but not a married monk, which is a contradiction in any tradition, Buddhist or otherwise, which has monasticism.
I think the discussion about Buddhism in Japan in the past is a bit irrelevant, what is more important is the state of Buddhadharma in Japan currently and its prospects for long-term survival.
jundo cohen wrote:
Personally, I believe that we follow the Vinaya. Whether the Vinaya follows us is a different question. So, I make no distinction in name or status between Bhiksu, Bhikkuni or Japanese Lineage Clergy with wife and child ... and believe that we all stand shoulder to shoulder as brothers and sisters, not ahead or behind, above or below.
Whether others feel the same is their own business.
Gassho, Jundo
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests