VINAYA RULES/WEE NEE – MONKS’ RULES OF CONDUCT/ CONFLICTING BEHAVIORS AND USEFUL LESSONS

MyitthaJune 8, 20103min299090

Following are prior postings saved from abandoned Burmese websites. They are reproduced at viewers’ requests. Opportune time, too. Buddha, himself, set up Vinaya monks’ rules. They protect and prolong the Sasana from wrongdoers. Bad priests breaking the Vinaya rules can destroy the Sasana. They smear other noble priests. They also scare away lay people.

================

Myittha
Posted on: 2007/12/11 21:47

VINAYA RULES/WEE NEE – MONKS’ RULES OF CONDUCT/ CONFLICTING BEHAVIORS & USEFUL LESSONS

I FOUND THESE VINAYA RULES ON THE INTERNET. THEY ARE SIMPLE, COMPREHENSIVE, AND EASY TO UNDERSTAND.

CLICK BELOW:


http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/ariyesako/layguide.html

The Bhikkhus’ Rules
A Guide for Laypeople

The Theravadin Buddhist Monk’s Rules
compiled and explained by
Bhikkhu Ariyesako

ADVANTAGES OF VINAYA RULES:


“Discipline is for the sake of restraint,


restraint for the sake of freedom from remorse,


freedom from remorse for the sake of joy,


joy for the sake of rapture,


rapture for the sake of tranquility,


tranquility for the sake of pleasure,


pleasure for the sake of concentration,


concentration for the sake of knowledge


and vision of things as they are,


knowledge and vision of things as they are


for the sake of disenchantment,


disenchantment for the sake of release,


release for the sake of knowledge and vision of release,


knowledge and vision of release


for the sake of total unbinding without clinging.”

(INTERPRETATION)

Vinaya rules are for maintaining discipline (and order). Though discipline involves restraint, it ensures a joyful and tranquil atmosphere necessary to freely pursue knowledge and wisdom ( or vision) in order to attain higher spiritual levels.

90 comments

  • Myittha

    June 8, 2010 at 6:37 pm

    Kyaemon
    Posted on: 2008/4/2 23:16
    TUN KYI’S POSTING IN MDY GAZETTE (prior one)

    I like the postings about Ko Tin Htoon and his outstanding efforts for Azusa Temple .

    Having undergone through many tough public hearings, the trustees learned their hard won lessons. Although the final outcomes weren’t favorable, it’s his courage, cetana, hard work, leadership skills, and sacrifices for Azusa Temple and our community that really counted. We admire him for these qualities.

    A curious incident. As mentioned, I also heard that Ko Tin Htoon had worked very hard to organize the Chairman of the American Council of Buddhist Associations who was a 70 year old Sri Lankan monk, a downtown Sri Lankan Temple head monk, and several interfaith church leaders from Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Christian, and Latter Day Saints faiths to speak for us at the all important San Bernardino County Supervisors’ public hearing, 50 miles away.

    I heard that there was a preparatory meeting at Azusa Temple. I heard that at the meeting, Ko Tin Htoon learned that U Aye Thaka, the lead monk, couldn’t attend the San Bernardino public hearing. The lead monk was flying to New York instead. He was going with a Diamond Bar doctor and the latter’s guest monk from Burma.

    I heard that Ko Tin Htoon requested U Aye Thaka to forgo the New York trip. He reasoned with the monk that the public hearing was deciding a Temple permit’s fate. I
    heard that he told the monk that this was even more important. The trip was just a private and a social one and optional.

    Contd

  • Myittha

    June 8, 2010 at 6:38 pm

    Continuation

    He said that we had to put the Temple’s interests first. Moreover, he told him that those prominent church leaders were coming. He said that would look awkward for the applying Temple’s lead monk to be absent.

    He reasoned with him several times. I heard that he told the lead monk how hard he had to organize for help and support from other church leaders. I heard that they were to no avail. The monk wasn’t swayed. He was really headstrong.

    I heard that the lead monk was bent on going on the New York trip.

    TO BE CONTINUED
    ————–

    CURIOUS INCIDENT CONTINUED

    I heard that trustees knew that the lead monk couldn’t even speak a few words in English at the public hearing.

    Otherwise, it would have been impressive and meaningful. I heard that they knew they had to rely on other church leaders who could. I heard that since this was a religious issue, church leaders speaking on religious terms would be really impressive.

    This was especially when other faiths were taking the trouble to help us. I heard that some felt rather sad that the lead monk couldn’t even lend his mere presence. I heard that some felt being really let down at a crucial time.

    I heard that however, seeing that the monk won’t budge an inch, and out of respect for the monk’s robe, some trustees had to apologize to Ko Tin Htoon. They felt that they had no choice but to comfort Ko Tin Htoon. They wouldn’t like to impose on the monk either.

    Contd.

  • Myittha

    June 8, 2010 at 6:40 pm

    Continuation

    In retrospect, I heard that others could see people who really were motivated and dedicated. Others could see people who were morally upright and conscientious, & who worked very hard and really put the community’s or temple’s interests above their petty selves.

    They say that these were in stark contrast to yet some other people who couldn’t rise above themselves and who shirked their responsibilities.

    They say that when it came time for “mingalar yuu,” recognition time, some less deserving people knew how to stake a larger claim than they deserve while those hardworking & deserving people like Ko Tin Htoon were sadly shunted aside or ignored or forgotten.

    They say that these noble people’s modesty and humility prevented them from laying claim to anything. They had to be satisfied with whatever small morsels other ‘cleverer” people deigned to throw them their way.

    Contd

  • Myittha

    June 8, 2010 at 6:41 pm

    Continuation

    That’s life, some say. Do you think that’s fair? Would you stand for it? What are you going to do about it? What say you?

    Wee Nee Comment

    In my opinion, going to New York at a crucial time would be breaking the Wee Nee. Monks are not allowed to go sightseeing. Travels at certain times of the day and at certain months are restricted. It seemed the monk took advantage of the humble & obliging trustees at the time.

    For a public figure and a lead monk, there was no real justification for his action. It all looked selfish, weak, and childish to me.

    Thanks for reading. Please comment.

  • Myittha

    June 8, 2010 at 6:43 pm

    Kyaemon
    Posted on: 2008/4/2 23:20
    MYITTHA’S POSTING IN MDY GAZETTE (defunct one)

    Thank you Ko Kyaw Htin for sharing Azusa Temple’s interesting past history. See prior links. Finally, valuable lessons do come out from the Burmese Classic interview. However, most of them are from lay people.

    True!! In the interview, the monk didn’t give any credit to Ko Tin Htoon. What a shame!! Not a trustee and therefore not duty bound, he was helping out of pure goodwill. A noble person indeed!!! Was this the only incident or lapse?

    No!!! There were several others. Examples: The monk didn’t recognize Ko Henry Kao and Ma Noelene either. As with Ko Tin Htoon, they, too, weren’t obligated at all. They weren’t trustees. Yet, they and their extended families played critical leading roles, together with the hardworking trustees in 8 Nibban Ze & in most Patthana festivals.They were noble too.

    Being not obligated like trustees, they all deserve extra care and some recognition on their own special merits. Likewise, the monk ignored many more major donors (say $20,000 to $ 75,000) and guarantors as well. Not just a single lapse but quite a unique behavior pattern!!!

    Contd

  • Myittha

    June 8, 2010 at 6:44 pm

    Continuation

    I definitely know that it’s against our Myanmar Lugyi Wut for not recognizing people’s efforts as in “Pay Kamm Chee Myint” (Giving praise, appreciation, or reward).

    The Lawka Nithi, a code of ethics, was taught in almost all Myanmar monasteries and schools. It’s ingrained in our Myanmar culture. The Niti Kyan Ethics was originally in Pali and was translated to Burmese. E Fowle again translated it to English. Some relevant extracts below:

    #47. Be thankful for the feast when you have partaken of it.
    #45. Give thanks and praise to soldiers when they return victorious from the battle.
    #46. Be grateful and pleased when your grain is stored in your granary.
    #89. Be thankful to the horse that has carried you safely and swiftly to the end of your journey.
    #90 Be thankful to the bullock that has carried your burden.

    #91. Be thankful to the cow that gives her milk freely.
    To me, it looks like the lead monk forgot his Niti Kyan or he could care less about our Myanmar culture.

    How about the Wee Nee monks’ rules?

  • Myittha

    June 8, 2010 at 6:45 pm

    Kyaemon
    Posted on: 2008/4/2 23:22

    THISSA’S POSTING IN MDY GAZETTE (defunct one)

    Ko Tun Kyi’s prior posting about a curious incident is a real eye opener. Not every monk is a God-King. In fact, Lord Buddha and his Vinaya rules didn’t allow God-Kings at all. Some monks would like to pretend or claim to be God-Kings. His posting is very informative about human weaknesses in some monks.

    I agree with Ko Myittha & Ko Tun Kyi’s comments. Regarding Wee Nee Vinaya rules, I am sorry to say the monk would have broken them also. It looks like he’s guilty of “Lawba, R Ka di” (Greed, unskillful trait) as well as “Kyay zuu mathi tat, R Ka di” on Gratitude. Not being grateful is a bad trait for a monk. It seems that he needs to change all these bad traits. Per Wee Nee, a monk is not supposed to have even one of these clingings & R Ka di’s.

    From prior postings, it seems that his Greed was for fame. He wanted all the credit for himself. That seems to be the reason why in the interview, he ignored Ko Tin Htoon, Ko Henry Kao and Noelene, many major donors and helpers. Probably, Fame can at times translate into Nawa Kama personal donations from other unknowing people.

    Yes, it’s really incredible for a lead monk to act like that. But wait!!! Some more! Say intentionally or not, a person didn’t treat others right. Does he have the face to unabashedly seek help again from these same persons? What’s your answer? Most right thinking persons would be ashamed or would feel bad to ask them again for help.

    But not this monk!

    TO BE CONTINUED. SEE “HELP”

  • Myittha

    June 8, 2010 at 6:47 pm

    Kyaemon
    Posted on: 2008/4/2 23:23

    THISSA’S POSTING IN MDY GAZETTE (old)

    “HELP” CONTINUED

    1. Did he think he had every right to do so? If so, won’t it indicate a huge ego like a despotic king, demanding this and that from his subjects with no “R nar” or remorse?

    2. Did he ever realize that he had done wrong to the persons concerned? If he didn’t realize it, won’t this ignorance indicate that he didn’t even know a wrong behavior from a right one? Is he really a “knowledgeable” lead monk?

    3. On the other hand, if he is knowingly being ungrateful, it would be even worse for a lead monk. Is there any remorse up to now?

    I, too, found some good Burmese sayings from the Niti Kyan, the Ethics Bible followed by our Myanmar lay people everywhere. It’s another sign of a cultured people and we take pride in this. Naturally, the Vinaya is even nobler & stricter. However, the Niti Kyan offers useful lessons for monks as well.

    Extracts translated from our Burmese Niti Ethics bible:

    49-50.A man who continually asks favors is not liked. A man who never confers favors should not be liked.

    17. The wealth of priests, moral precepts.

    34. Every scented tree is not a santagoo tree.

    Contd

  • Myittha

    June 8, 2010 at 6:48 pm

    Continuation

    59. Associate with the virtuous, and when you have learned their law you can come to no harm…… but cling to the virtuous.

    83. It is unfortunate to be in contact with …… but to be near those who are ungrateful is to be more unfortunate still.

    145. When priests and kings become dissatisfied (meaning demanding and unappreciative), there is no chance for them (no hope or redemption), they are lost….

    Meatphar’s 1/22/08 posting pointed out a famous saying “Ta loke sar bhuu thu kyae zhuu.”[Be grateful for even a mouthful (of someone’s food.)]” He was referring to the monk’s ingratitude for ignoring many Temple lenders and guarantors. Link below:

    http://myanmargazette.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=thread&topic_id=341&forum=20&post_id=1012

  • Myittha

    June 8, 2010 at 7:37 pm

    Continuation

    59. Associate with the virtuous, and when you have learned their law you can come to no harm…… but cling to the virtuous.

    83. It is unfortunate to be in contact with …… but to be near those who are ungrateful is to be more unfortunate still.

    145. When priests and kings become dissatisfied (meaning demanding and unappreciative), there is no chance for them (no hope or redemption), they are lost….

    Meatphar’s 1/22/08 posting pointed out a famous saying “Ta loke sar bhuu thu kyae zhuu.”[Be grateful for even a mouthful (of someone’s food.)]” He was referring to the monk’s ingratitude for ignoring many Temple lenders and guarantors. Link below:

    http://myanmargazette.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=thread&topic_id=341&forum=20&post_id=1012 (old expired web)

Leave a Reply