Why do monks reside in temples

A forum for those wishing to discuss Buddhist history and teachings in the Western academic manner, referencing appropriate sources.
neander
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2020 10:24 pm

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by neander »

[/quote]

According to Vinaya the making or constructing a vihara for the Sangha was a regulated practice of earning merit for the wealthy laity. The Sangha did own buildings and/or monasteries. (source, Gregory Schopen: Monks, Nuns and Worldly Matters).
[/quote]

This is indeed true, and since you mentioned Gregory Schopen I advise everybody to watch his lectures sangha monasteries and financing

User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Aemilius »

Here are three sutras not spoken in a monastery:

"on one occasion the Blessed One was journeying along a road in the Kosalan country with Ven. Nāgasamāla as his junior companion." Dvidhapatha Sutta: A Fork in the Path

The country of Kosala was located to the north-west of Magadha, with its capital at Ayodhya. Its territory corresponded to the modern Awadh (or Oudh) in Central and Eastern Uttar Pradesh. It had the river Ganges for its southern, the river Gandak (Narayani) for its eastern, and the Himalaya mountains for its northern boundary.


"on one occasion, while the Blessed One was wandering among the Magadhans with a large community of monks, he arrived at Pāṭali Village. The lay followers of Pāṭali Village heard, "The Blessed One, they say, while wandering among the Magadhans with a large community of monks, has reached Pāṭali Village." So they went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As they were was sitting there, they said to him, 'Lord, may the Blessed One acquiesce to (the use of) the rest-house hall.' " Pāṭaligāma Sutta: At Pāṭaligā Village


"on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Vesālī at the Gabled Hall in the Great Forest." Āyusama-osajjana Sutta: Relinquishment of the Life Force

Vajji (Sanskrit: Vṛji) or Vrijji was a confederacy of neighbouring clans including the Licchavis, it is one of the principal Mahājanapadas (sixteen Great countries) of Ancient India. The area they ruled constitutes the region of Mithila in northern Bihar and their capital was the city of Vaishali or Vesali.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Aemilius »

Two rather interesting sutras about Buddha's life in the open. But what is "Gaya Head" just escapes me ?

"on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Pāva at the Ajakalāpaka [Herd-of-Goats] shrine, the dwelling of the Ajakalāpaka spirit. And on that occasion, in the pitch-black darkness of the night, the Blessed One was sitting in the open air, and the rain was falling in scattered drops." Aja Sutta: Aja

"on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Gayā at Gayā Head. And on that occasion, many ascetics — on the cold winter nights of the "Between-the-Eights, when the snow was falling in Gayā — "Jaṭila Sutta: Ascetics (transl. Thanissaro Bhikkhu)
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
neander
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2020 10:24 pm

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by neander »

please also read the article from prof. Gregory Shopen, who is indeed one of the most reputable scholars we have: Cross-Dressing with the Dead:

There is no evidence for Buddhist monasteries either before or during the Mauryan period

no evidence that monasteries existed during Ashoka (Ashoka did not grant any tax reduction to any monasteries but only to the village of Lumbini), you can also find more interesting details

it seems certain monastic residential quarters appeared well after Ashoka and probably near the beginning of common era



_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nichiren — 'A coward cannot have any prayer answered.'
Last edited by neander on Mon Dec 14, 2020 10:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Aemilius »

I am aware of that kind of views, which I find quite amazing, considering how often monasteries are mentioned in the sutras. There are notable people who think otherwise, there is archeological evidence for six of the monasteries that are mentioned in Tripitaka, according to Sravasti Dhammika.

"Jetavana (lit. 'Jeta's grove') was one of the most famous of the Buddhist monasteries or viharas in India (present-day Uttar Pradesh). It was the second vihara donated to Gautama Buddha after the Venuvana in Rajgir. The monastery was given to him by his chief male lay disciple, Anathapindika.
Jetavana is located just outside the old city of Savatthi.
Jetavana was the place where the Buddha gave the majority of his teachings and discourses, having stayed at Jetavana nineteen out of 45 varshas/vassas (rainy seasons retreats), more than in any other monastery."

Image

Mulagandhakuti. The remains of Buddha's hut in Jetavana Monastery
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9441
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

CosmosFF wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 3:00 pmInstead of living in shacks or caves? What is the use of buildings being grand and ornamented when their inhabitants are supposed to achieve some state of not wanting that stuff? thats why you go there...
“to achieve some state of not wanting that stuff?”
is not the purpose of becoming a monk, or even the reason “why you go there” (to live at, or even take a short retreat at a monastery).

Indeed, it’s usually the case that by the time one decides to become a monk or nun, one has already given up looking to worldly things as a source of meaning in their lives. The point of going monastic isn’t to enter some sort of boot camp with the aim oft prying one away from wanting things.

The purpose of all Dharma practice, lay or ordained, is of course, liberation from samsara.

There are, of course, those who believe that a strict and extreme abandonment of all material needs and comforts is required to attain that release. That is still the case among many sadhus in India.

Reading the story of the Buddha Shakyamuni, we see that Siddhartha also believed this for a while, when he nearly starved to death, until a young woman offered him a little food, some yogurt and rice, I think.
The five other ascetics Siddhartha had kept company with were outraged and, convinced that he had given up the task of attaining realization, abandoned him (they later became his first disciples).

This is a very important part of the story for understanding the Buddhist teachings: what Siddhartha realized was that extremes either way, of material indulgence or of total deprivation, neither will lead one away from suffering.
Whether one lives in a modern monastery with others or in a cave by oneself has more to do with what one feels will be most helpful to one’s practice. It has nothing to do with having or not having electricity and running water and WiFi.

It is true historically, however, that in monasteries and temples which had acquired great wealth, power, and influence, as they had in Tibet, corruption would sometimes follow. This still sometimes occurs (Kalu Rinpoche frequently talks about confronting this). But similar problems occurred during the time of the Buddha, which is partly why there are so many rules for monks!

So, the idea that a monk must strive to live with as few comforts as he can, that’s also a form of attachment, of ego clinging. On the other hand, a monk may live at a temple that is as ornate as a palace, yet have no attachment to its outward appearance at all. Likewise, a lay person can pursue all sorts of worldly goals, even fame and fortune, and as long as they don’t regard these things as substantial, as leading to happiness, but instead put such rewards to use for the benefit of others, one can still practice and attain degrees of realization and liberation even within this lifetime.
The “stuff” itself isn’t the problem.
One’s own mind is what one has to pay attention to, because ultimately, that’s where you live.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
neander
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2020 10:24 pm

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by neander »

Aemilius wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 9:56 am I am aware of that kind of views, which I find quite amazing, considering how often monasteries are mentioned in the sutras. There are notable people who think otherwise, there is archeological evidence for six of the monasteries that are mentioned in Tripitaka, according to Sravasti Dhammika.

"Jetavana (lit. 'Jeta's grove') was one of the most famous of the Buddhist monasteries or viharas in India (present-day Uttar Pradesh). It was the second vihara donated to Gautama Buddha after the Venuvana in Rajgir. The monastery was given to him by his chief male lay disciple, Anathapindika.
Jetavana is located just outside the old city of Savatthi.
Jetavana was the place where the Buddha gave the majority of his teachings and discourses, having stayed at Jetavana nineteen out of 45 varshas/vassas (rainy seasons retreats), more than in any other monastery."

Image

Mulagandhakuti. The remains of Buddha's hut in Jetavana Monastery
prof. Schopen's article explains the following as far as I understand:

There is no archeological evidence of Buddhist monasteries during Ashoka , Ashoka during his visit to Lumpini granted a tax reduction to the whole village and not to any monastery, please note that at the times monks were subject to various kind of taxes

Later inscriptions from Bharhut and Sanchi did not mention anything so there is no archeological evidence until Kharoshı¯ records

The enormous Vinaya literature was composed in the monasteries as you know after the Mauryan period, and this literature as you say describe the various temples that were supposedly Buddhist but there is no archeological record of this, there is an archeological record of the buildings themselves but no record they were used by Buddha apart from the suttas.

And the real problem is the following as brilliantly points out prof Schopen: with complex buildings comes maintenance plus all kind of issues that require financial support, this support establishing long-lasting relations with the donors that compromises the doctrine with changes and modifications always under close scrutiny, the power of money is not a modern thing so the whole suttas received today were indeed revised, changed to suit the donors' values and political agenda...


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nichiren — 'A coward cannot have any prayer answered.'
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17092
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

neander wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:11 pm
Aemilius wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 9:56 am I am aware of that kind of views, which I find quite amazing, considering how often monasteries are mentioned in the sutras. There are notable people who think otherwise, there is archeological evidence for six of the monasteries that are mentioned in Tripitaka, according to Sravasti Dhammika.

"Jetavana (lit. 'Jeta's grove') was one of the most famous of the Buddhist monasteries or viharas in India (present-day Uttar Pradesh). It was the second vihara donated to Gautama Buddha after the Venuvana in Rajgir. The monastery was given to him by his chief male lay disciple, Anathapindika.
Jetavana is located just outside the old city of Savatthi.
Jetavana was the place where the Buddha gave the majority of his teachings and discourses, having stayed at Jetavana nineteen out of 45 varshas/vassas (rainy seasons retreats), more than in any other monastery."

Image

Mulagandhakuti. The remains of Buddha's hut in Jetavana Monastery
prof. Schopen's article explains the following as far as I understand:

There is no archeological evidence of Buddhist monasteries during Ashoka , Ashoka during his visit to Lumpini granted a tax reduction to the whole village and not to any monastery, please note that at the times monks were subject to various kind of taxes

Later inscriptions from Bharhut and Sanchi did not mention anything so there is no archeological evidence until Kharoshı¯ records

The enormous Vinaya literature was composed in the monasteries as you know after the Mauryan period, and this literature as you say describe the various temples that were supposedly Buddhist but there is no archeological record of this, there is an archeological record of the buildings themselves but no record they were used by Buddha apart from the suttas.

And the real problem is the following as brilliantly points out prof Schopen: with complex buildings comes maintenance plus all kind of issues that require financial support, this support establishing long-lasting relations with the donors that compromises the doctrine with changes and modifications always under close scrutiny, the power of money is not a modern thing so the whole suttas received today were indeed revised, changed to suit the donors' values and political agenda...


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nichiren — 'A coward cannot have any prayer answered.'
So basically one scholar who points out a lack of records of monasteries at a given point in Buddhist history, combined with general suspicion of financial motives is your "evidence" that the entirety of ordained Buddhist history is somehow fake or misled. Do you have actual evidence of Suttas being altered or is that just another little sly piece of opinion you are trying to slip into the dearth of evidence to your argument?

Got it, totally logical and not at all a huge leap based mainly on your person biases. :roll: :roll:
there is an archeological record of the buildings themselves but no record they were used by Buddha apart from the suttas.
Again, produce the evidence that the Suttas were altered to reflect non-existent monasteries. Along a similar line, if Suttas are unreliable in the first place, what the heck are you doing trying to use them as evidence of anything? Please explain this implied conspiracy and what your evidence is. Keep in mind, by the ToS we are under no obligation to allow you to slander the concept of ordained communities, particularity when your evidence is this scant. I'm allowing you to respond but if you do not up your standard for evidence, you can go have this discussion somewhere else.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
neander
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2020 10:24 pm

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by neander »

Jhonnydangerous

If you have better scholarly evidence just post it...





________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nichiren — 'A coward cannot have any prayer answered.'
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17092
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

neander wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 9:16 pm Jhonnydangerous

If you have better scholarly evidence just post it...





________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nichiren — 'A coward cannot have any prayer answered.'
That's not how it works, when you make an extraordinary claim *you* put the burden of evidence on yourself. If you cannot produce it, you do not need to have the conversation on Dharmawheel, but should have it on a more appropriate site, dedicated to that sort of speculation.

You are claiming that the entire idea of ordained monastic communities is made up, and somehow inserted into Suttas. Please produce your evidence that this is so.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17092
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

The enormous Vinaya literature was composed in the monasteries as you know after the Mauryan period, and this literature as you say describe the various temples that were supposedly Buddhist but there is no archeological record of this, there is an archeological record of the buildings themselves but no record they were used by Buddha apart from the suttas.

And the real problem is the following as brilliantly points out prof Schopen: with complex buildings comes maintenance plus all kind of issues that require financial support, this support establishing long-lasting relations with the donors that compromises the doctrine with changes and modifications always under close scrutiny, the power of money is not a modern thing so the whole suttas received today were indeed revised, changed to suit the donors' values and political agend
Taken together this is tantamount to a claim that Suttas were altered in order to create monastic Buddhism. If that is not the implication here, then it is simply speculation of a kind not suited to the forum.

If it is not simply speculation, then it's the sort of thing one should produce evidence of, rather than just allude to.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Genjo Conan
Posts: 716
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:27 pm

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Genjo Conan »

And frankly I think the argument is silly in the first place. Even assuming that organized monasteries didn't exist during Sakyamuni's lifetime, all that would show is that they didn't exist, not that they're somehow adharmic.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Aemilius »

neander wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:11 pm
Aemilius wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 9:56 am I am aware of that kind of views, which I find quite amazing, considering how often monasteries are mentioned in the sutras. There are notable people who think otherwise, there is archeological evidence for six of the monasteries that are mentioned in Tripitaka, according to Sravasti Dhammika.

"Jetavana (lit. 'Jeta's grove') was one of the most famous of the Buddhist monasteries or viharas in India (present-day Uttar Pradesh). It was the second vihara donated to Gautama Buddha after the Venuvana in Rajgir. The monastery was given to him by his chief male lay disciple, Anathapindika.
Jetavana is located just outside the old city of Savatthi.
Jetavana was the place where the Buddha gave the majority of his teachings and discourses, having stayed at Jetavana nineteen out of 45 varshas/vassas (rainy seasons retreats), more than in any other monastery."

Image

Mulagandhakuti. The remains of Buddha's hut in Jetavana Monastery
prof. Schopen's article explains the following as far as I understand:

There is no archeological evidence of Buddhist monasteries during Ashoka, Ashoka during his visit to Lumpini granted a tax reduction to the whole village and not to any monastery, please note that at the times monks were subject to various kind of taxes

Later inscriptions from Bharhut and Sanchi did not mention anything so there is no archeological evidence until Kharoshı¯ records

The enormous Vinaya literature was composed in the monasteries as you know after the Mauryan period, and this literature as you say describe the various temples that were supposedly Buddhist but there is no archeological record of this, there is an archeological record of the buildings themselves but no record they were used by Buddha apart from the suttas.

And the real problem is the following as brilliantly points out prof Schopen: with complex buildings comes maintenance plus all kind of issues that require financial support, this support establishing long-lasting relations with the donors that compromises the doctrine with changes and modifications always under close scrutiny, the power of money is not a modern thing so the whole suttas received today were indeed revised, changed to suit the donors' values and political agenda...


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nichiren — 'A coward cannot have any prayer answered.'
The ruins of the monasteries are an evidence. What is at stake here is that Buddha was a well known and successful spiritual leader whose influence penetrated the sixteen states of ancient India. And Anathapindika, Visakha and other wealthy persons were his supporters, who spent considerable wealth for the purpose of supporting the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. Or were they not? Is that what you are saying?

It was probably self-evident that monasteries were exempt from taxes.

We know that after the various splits the Buddhist schools all possessed more or less the same Vinaya. I think this proves that the Vinaya is old and it was well established before Ashoka, it existed already at the time of Buddha. It cannot have been composed after the Mauryan period.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Aemilius »

Etienne Lamotte: History of Indian Buddhism, p. 174..175 :

"Sing yu, Ch'u san tsang chi chi (T 2145, ch. 3, p. 20a 24) : "In the past, Mahakashyapa held the Baskets of the Law. He transmitted them to Ananda and so on down to the fifth master Upagupta. Originally, the Pitaka consisted of 80 recitations, but since later generations had weak faculties (mrdvindriya) and could not learn it, Upagupta reduced it to 10 recitations". Hui chiao, Kao sgng chuan* (T 2059, ch. 1 I, p. 403a) : "Upali made 80 attempts to recite the Vinaya : hence the title of 'Vinaya in 80 recitations'. Then there were Kashyapa, Ananda, Madhyantika, Shanavasa and Upagupta : those five Arhats preserved the Vinaya in turn".

Kumarajiva in his translation of the UpadeSa (T 1509, ch. 100, p. 756c) : "The abridged (sic) account of the Vinaya is in 80 sections and the Vinaya texts are of two kinds : 1. The Vinaya from the land of Mathura which, with its Avadanas and Jatakas, consist of 80 sections; 2. The Vinaya from the land of Kashmir which has excluded the Jatakas and Avadanas : the latter has simply retained the essential parts and consists of only 10 sections. However, there is a Vibhasha in 80 sections which comments upon it."

The Buddhist tradition had a strong feeling that the Vinaya was actually much longer at the time of Buddha Shakyamuni.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Malcolm »

neander wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:11 pm
prof. Schopen's article explains the following as far as I understand:

There is no archeological evidence of Buddhist monasteries during Ashoka ,
Yes, there is no evidence of Buddhist monasteries with stone structures prior to 350 CE because Indians did not start buildings structures out of stone until comparatively late, around 350 CE. This cannot and does exclude viharas with wooden and thatch structures, evidence of which doesn’t survive well in the humid, hot climate of India.
neander
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2020 10:24 pm

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by neander »

Aemilius wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:50 am Etienne Lamotte: History of Indian Buddhism, p. 174..175 :

"Sing yu, Ch'u san tsang chi chi (T 2145, ch. 3, p. 20a 24) : "In the past, Mahakashyapa held the Baskets of the Law. He transmitted them to Ananda and so on down to the fifth master Upagupta. Originally, the Pitaka consisted of 80 recitations, but since later generations had weak faculties (mrdvindriya) and could not learn it, Upagupta reduced it to 10 recitations". Hui chiao, Kao sgng chuan* (T 2059, ch. 1 I, p. 403a) : "Upali made 80 attempts to recite the Vinaya : hence the title of 'Vinaya in 80 recitations'. Then there were Kashyapa, Ananda, Madhyantika, Shanavasa and Upagupta : those five Arhats preserved the Vinaya in turn".

Kumarajiva in his translation of the UpadeSa (T 1509, ch. 100, p. 756c) : "The abridged (sic) account of the Vinaya is in 80 sections and the Vinaya texts are of two kinds : 1. The Vinaya from the land of Mathura which, with its Avadanas and Jatakas, consist of 80 sections; 2. The Vinaya from the land of Kashmir which has excluded the Jatakas and Avadanas : the latter has simply retained the essential parts and consists of only 10 sections. However, there is a Vibhasha in 80 sections which comments upon it."

The Buddhist tradition had a strong feeling that the Vinaya was actually much longer at the time of Buddha Shakyamuni.

This text is quite old, thanks to the digital revolution, modern Buddhism studies advanced incredibly fast, if you want to refer to french Buddhism just listen 5 minutes to this 2018 conference of the French scholar B. Faure:



However here the topic is another one, I do not have anything to add, everybody, can make up his mind.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Nichiren — 'A coward cannot have any prayer answered.'
Top
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Aemilius »

Malcolm wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 12:48 pm
neander wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 8:11 pm
prof. Schopen's article explains the following as far as I understand:

There is no archeological evidence of Buddhist monasteries during Ashoka ,
Yes, there is no evidence of Buddhist monasteries with stone structures prior to 350 CE because Indians did not start buildings structures out of stone until comparatively late, around 350 CE. This cannot and does exclude viharas with wooden and thatch structures, evidence of which doesn’t survive well in the humid, hot climate of India.
Indians were already building houses from bricks during the Indus valley civilisation, that is 1700...
2500 BCE. The oldest stone temples also come from this era. The desriptions in Vinaya that involve monks making bricks are consistent with the house building techniques that existed in Northern India at the time of Buddha.

https://classroom.synonym.com/did-house ... 11459.html
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9441
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Anyway, the idea that if you are living under a roof, then you aren’t really a monk, is absurd.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
tingdzin
Posts: 1947
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 7:19 am

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by tingdzin »

This is an interesting discussion, but the fact is that we can never know what "Original Buddhism" was like, and the urge to say it was either this or that is usually based on peoples' preconceptions, and desires of what they think it should have been.

Pointing to masonry structures at traditionally Buddhist sites as evidence that Buddha's followers lived in them from the beginning, however, is pretty risky; a lot of Buddhist sites that have been excavated show considerable changes over the centuries as shown in different historical strata. Sites like Jetavanarama may be nothing like they were when the Buddha was around. As Malcolm pointed out, stone structures are not the same as grass huts, and to take the pictures of Buddha's alleged retreat dwelling as even approximating the footprint of what he stayed in requires a huge leap of faith. Yes, the Harappan civilization used stone, but we cannot assume that the Gangetic Plain civilizations followed suit and maintained a cultural continuity in that way unless there is some evidence, which there is not. It's a big mistake to think of "Indian civilization" a s a unified whole, especially in the earliest periods..

As far as the Vinaya, everyone knows there are many versions. Pace Aemilius, I don't know of any modern scholar who thinks there is a single authoritative Vinaya that used to be longer than the existing versions. The quotes from the Chinese may refer to the Dharmaguptakas, as they were the most important school in the early period of translation, being gradually superseded by the Sarvastivadins. It's also important to remember that Vinayas were not written down for a long, long time -- the earliest Chinese converts expressed exasperation that the Indian and Central Asian monks they were getting Buddhist texts from did not have "hard copies" of the Vinaya, it being based wholly on memorization.

Bronkhurst's and Schopen's books are quite interesting, and certainly prompt one to re-examine assumptions about early Buddhism and the actual historical evidence we have, or don't have, in relation to the received tradition. For my money, one of Bronkhurst's most useful observations is that Buddhism cannot be seen as a derivative of or a reaction to "Hinduism", because the two germinated in different geographic regions and subcultures of the Indian subcontinent. I also think it is undeniable that Buddhism underwent huge changes in institutional structure during the Maurya and Kushan periods.
User avatar
Shotenzenjin
Posts: 614
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 11:23 pm

Re: Why do monks reside in temples

Post by Shotenzenjin »

Fascinating discussion
Generation's shall pass, our determination shall grow, at the foot of Mount Fuji
Like smoke that reaches far beyond the clouds.--nichimoku shonin. Third high priest of Nichiren Shoshu

Hokekko of true Buddhism https://nstny.org

Introduction to Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... VKyEQ_cxK9
Post Reply

Return to “Academic Discussion”