[leflyCode]

Dear friends,

I was looking at a short article by Ajahn Brahm "The Meaning of Sangha" and I'd be interested in reading your comments.

http://www.dhammaloka.org.au/article...of-sangha.html

This part of the article also caught my attention:

..."many young lay Buddhist groups in Australia, Europe and the Americas are calling themselves Sangha, going for refuge to themselves, even worshipping themselves, and presuming this is Buddhism! This is sad, misleading and produces no progress on the Path.

It is far better to go for refuge to the Monastic Sangha and give respect to that Sangha, especially those within the monastic Sangha with attainment on the Path. Why? Because the monastic Sangha is also the physical expression of the Lord Buddha's Middle Way, it is the only authoritative Buddhist teaching organization and, thirdly, it is the flag of Buddhism capable of giving inspiration in the villages and cities of our world."

[juliannamed]

The word Sangha refers to the Ariya Sangha as well, not just the Bhikkhu Sangha. It is possible for a lay person to be part of the Ariya Sangha see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sangha

I agree that referring to ones sitting group for example as a Sangha is very optimistic and cheapens the word. However I'm not convinced that the Bhikkhu Sangha is the "only authoritative Buddhist teaching organization", it may have been 2500 years ago but Buddhism has adapted and evolved since then.

[gechaheritt]

The word Sangha refers to the Ariya Sangha as well, not just the Bhikkhu Sangha. It is possible for a lay person to be part of the Ariya Sangha

It says here:


Sangha
In the suttas the word sangha (lit. "group, assembly") is usually used in one of two ways: it refers either to the community of ordained monks and nuns (bhikkhu-sangha and bhikkhuni-sangha) or to the community of "noble ones" (ariya-sangha) — persons who have attained at least stream-entry, the first stage of Awakening.
Ariya Sangha is defined as stream-winner, once- returner, non- returner and arahant.


http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/sangha.html#types4

[robstamps]

Hi Aloka,

An interesting article, I agree with most of the points raised by Ajahn Brahm. One of the themes he highlights is the difference between a lay-teacher and a disciplined monk or nun:

The lifestyle of morality and restraint seen in the behaviour of a good monk or nun is a signpost to others that freedom lies within precepts, not beyond them. And the quietness and happiness of a trained monastic indicates the goal of the Noble Eightfold Path, which is the end of suffering. Good monks and nuns stand out as no lay person could, inspiring even non-Buddhists as worthy sons and daughters of the Lord Buddha. Like a patriot feels inspired and uplifted when they see the flag of their country, so a true Buddhist feels the same emotions on seeing the flag of the Sangha in a diligent monk or nun. This rings true with me from my own personal experience. Having attended lay sangha meetings in the past, I currently visit a monastic sangha when possible. Even if I can only manage it once a month or so, it makes me feel wonderful just being in their presence. There's something intangable about it; there's no 'hero worship' going on, just gratitude and contentment. I feel very fortunate to be able to receive teachings and guidance in this way.

[WeightWatchyshow]

Ariya Sangha is defined as stream-winner, once- returner, non- returner and arahant.

Yes, and being a Bhikkhu is not a pre-requisite so lay people can attain it, though admittedly you are not likely to find any in your sitting group down the road hence a misuse of the word.

[U5pz6B71]

Yes, and being a Bhikkhu is not a pre-requisite so lay people can attain it

Do you know of any sutta references for that, Goofaholix ?

[SaraKonradtt]

I feel very fortunate to be able to receive teachings and guidance in this way.

Yes, I understand how you feel about receiving guidance at a Forest Tradition monastery, JadeRabbit.

[Npbfamgt]

Do you know of any sutta references for that, Goofaholix ?

Bhikkhu Bodhi has written that "an important but generally neglected clue... is the fact that many of the Buddha's followers who attained the first three stages of awakening, from stream-entry through non-returning, were lay people."

Piya Tan wrote about this as well.

[Shootohoist]

Bhikkhu Bodhi has written that "an important but generally neglected clue... is the fact that many of the Buddha's followers who attained the first three stages of awakening, from stream-entry through non-returning, were lay people."

Piya Tan wrote about this as well.

Thanks Dave

[dhrishiasv]

The word Sangha refers to the Ariya Sangha as well, not just the Bhikkhu Sangha. It is possible for a lay person to be part of the Ariya Sangha see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sangha

I'm not convinced that the Bhikkhu Sangha is the "only authoritative Buddhist teaching organization", it may have been 2500 years ago but Buddhism has adapted and evolved since then.

hi Goofaholix

Traditionally, the word Sangha refers exclusively to the Ariya Sangha and does not refer to the Bhikkhu Sangha, per se, at all.

Praise for the Sangha

(LEADER): Handa mayaṃ saṅghābhithutiṃ karoma se:

Now let us give high praise to the Sangha:

(ALL):

[Yo so supaṭipanno] bhagavato sāvaka-saṅgho,

The Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples who have practiced well,

Uju-paṭipanno bhagavato sāvaka-saṅgho,

the Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples who have practiced straightforwardly,

Ñāya-paṭipanno bhagavato sāvaka-saṅgho,

the Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples who have practiced methodically,

Sāmīci-paṭipanno bhagavato sāvaka-saṅgho,

the Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples who have practiced masterfully,

Yadidaṃ cattāri purisa-yugāni aṭṭha purisa-puggalā:

i.e., the four pairs — the eight types — of Noble Ones:

Esa bhagavato sāvaka-saṅgho —

That is the Sangha of the Blessed One's disciples —

Āhuneyyo pāhuneyyo dakkhiṇeyyo añjali-karaṇīyo,

worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of respect,

Anuttaraṃ puññakkhettaṃ lokassa:

the incomparable field of merit for the world:

Tam-ahaṃ saṅghaṃ abhipūjayāmi,
Tam-ahaṃ saṅghaṃ sirasā namāmi.

I worship most highly that Sangha,
To that Sangha I bow my head down.

(BOW DOWN) this is the same as the word 'Dhamma', which, traditionally, refers exclusively to the here-&-now lokuttara Dhamma:

Praise for the Dhamma

(LEADER): Handa mayaṃ dhammābhithutiṃ karoma se:

Now let us give high praise to the Dhamma:

(ALL):

[Yo so svākkhāto] bhagavatā dhammo,

The Dhamma well-expounded by the Blessed One,

Sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko,

to be seen here & now, timeless [immediately effective], inviting all to come & see,

Opanayiko paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhi:

leading inward, to be seen by the wise for themselves:

Tam-ahaṃ dhammaṃ abhipūjayāmi,
Tam-ahaṃ dhammaṃ sirasā namāmi.

I worship most highly that Dhamma,
To that Dhamma I bow my head down.

(BOW DOWN) regards

[zithromaxlinks]

The Anapanasati Sutta, at least, describes the bhikkhusanghe as those monks dedicated to 'heartwood', i.e., lokuttara dhamma

Per the Anapanasati Sutta, it could be speculated that monks that dedicate their lives to studying & taking refuge in Professor Ian Stevenson (& the like), in order to preach a doctrine of literal meta-physical reincarnation, probably do not even fall into the bhikkhusanghe, let alone the ariyasanghe

Whilst Ajahn Brahm may have a point, I find consistent with his point is more & more Western Buddhists, including Western monks, are taking refuge in Western scholars, such as Gombrich, Professor Ian Stevenson & the like, instead of the Noble Sangha that have dedicated their practise to the realisation of heartwood (Emptiness)

For example, Ajahn Brahm teaches Dependent Origination different to the lokuttara view of Ajahn Chah; focuses on worldly states such as jhana; & regards the cessation of perception & feeling as Nibbana. Such doctines are not 'heartwood'.



Monks, this assembly is free from idle chatter, devoid of idle chatter, and is established on pure heartwood: such is this community of monks (bhikkhusanghe), such is this assembly. The sort of assembly that is worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of respect, an incomparable field of merit for the world: such is this community of monks, such is this assembly. The sort of assembly to which a small gift, when given, becomes great, and a great gift greater: such is this community of monks, such is this assembly. The sort of assembly that it is rare to see in the world: such is this community of monks, such is this assembly — the sort of assembly that it would be worth traveling for leagues, taking along provisions, in order to see.

In this community of monks there are monks who are arahants, whose mental effluents are ended, who have reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, laid to waste the fetter of becoming, and who are released through right gnosis: such are the monks in this community of monks.

In this community of monks there are monks who, with the wasting away of the five lower fetters, are due to spontaneously arise [in the Pure Abodes], there to be totally unbound, destined never again to return from that world: such are the monks in this community of monks.

In this community of monks there are monks who, with the wasting away of [the first] three fetters, and with the attenuation of passion, aversion & delusion, are once-returners, who — on returning only once more to this world — will make an ending to stress: such are the monks in this community of monks.

In this community of monks there are monks who, with the wasting away of [the first] three fetters, are stream-winners, steadfast, never again destined for states of woe, headed for self-awakening: such are the monks in this community of monks.

In this community of monks there are monks who remain devoted to the development of the four frames of reference... the four right exertions... the four bases of power... the five faculties... the five strengths... the seven factors for awakening... the noble eightfold path: such are the monks in this community of monks.

In this community of monks there are monks who remain devoted to the development of good will... compassion... appreciation... equanimity... [the perception of the] foulness [of the body]... the perception of inconstancy: such are the monks in this community of monks.

In this community of monks there are monks who remain devoted to mindfulness with in-&-out breathing.

Anapanasati Sutta

[sapedotru]

....I find consistent with his point is more & more Western Buddhists, including Western monks, are taking refuge in Western scholars, such as Gombrich, Professor Ian Stevenson & the like, instead of the Noble Sangha that have dedicated their practise to the realisation of heartwood (Emptiness)

I wonder if this is because Buddhism may have become more of an intellectual exercise for some, rather like reading, studying and writing essays for a university degree. There are so many books and different sites on the internet that can be read and pondered endlessly. However, some of this information could be pointless gobbledegook and there's always a possibly that the all important ground-level practice might be getting neglected in the process.

It also seems like people might be becoming less inclined to actually seek out teachers and meditation groups if it requires some travel out of their local area, or a weekend away at a centre or monastery. (I'm not including people with disabilites or heavy family/work commitments in that)

[liontutuxx]

It also seems like people might be becoming less inclined to actually seek out teachers and meditation groups if it requires some travel out of their local area, or a weekend away at a centre or monastery.

This is where Ajahn Brahm's view is similar to a return to the Dark Ages, where priests ruled over society. What is sad is the impression of disempowering laity & creating dependence on monks.

What is absurd about AB's view is, in reality, there are very few monks in the Western cities. For example, in Sydney, Australia's largest city, 7 years ago, there were probably two or three Western monks in the whole city.

If the laity in the big cities are not going to consider themselves as Sangha then what will they regard as Sangha? Some monks living in the forest that regard city life is unworthy?

Sangha, in its essense, represents 'practise'. When people come together & sit together in meditation, that is Sangha.

[nithhysfusy]

I wonder if this is because Buddhism may have become more of an intellectual exercise for some, rather like reading, studying and writing essays for a university degree. There are so many books and different sites on the internet that can be read and pondered endlessly. However, some of this information could be pointless gobbledegook and there's always a possibly that the all important ground-level practice might be getting neglected in the process.

It also seems like people might be becoming less inclined to actually seek out teachers and meditation groups if it requires some travel out of their local area, or a weekend away at a centre or monastery. (I'm not including people with disabilites or heavy family/work commitments in that)

I'm guilty of that on both counts

Personally speaking, I've found that over-intellectualisation just leads me to confusion rather than understanding!

On the second point, I think this is really important, it was only when I made an effort to seek out a good teacher and sangha that my practice started to progress. Diddiling about with different groups in my local area did not help as they never felt 'right' to me.

I finally found some peace settling on the Thai Forest Tradition of Ajahn Chah, and am very grateful to those people on this forum for giving me the encouragement and guidance to keep looking (particularly Aloka, Esho, and Element).

[wbeachcomber]

I finally found some peace settling on the Thai Forest Tradition of Ajahn Chah,

Yes me too - and something I noticed about Amaravati is that experienced lay practitioners also lead retreats and practice days for the lay community, as well as the ordained sangha.

[OnlineViagraCheapestFREE]

the history of Theravadin Buddhism in the West, particularly meditation, has very strong roots in lay practitioners, particularly in the USA. it was the lay practitioners that set up the major meditation centres in the USA. Goenka was also a lay practitioner, who established many meditation centres

[hubua990]

In the Dakkhinavibhanga Sutta (Majjhima 142), the Buddha said that, “an offering made to the monastic Sangha is incalculable, immeasurable. And, I say, that in no way does a gift to a person individually ever have a greater fruit than an offering made to the monastic Sangha”.

http://www.dhammaloka.org.au/article...of-sangha.html

AB often seems to justify his views with the more dodgy suttas, such as MN 142, which states:

this can be compared to the Dhammapada, which states:

307. There are many evil characters and uncontrolled men wearing the saffron robe. These wicked men will be born in states of woe because of their evil deeds.

308. It would be better to swallow a red-hot iron ball, blazing like fire, than as an immoral and uncontrolled monk to eat the alms of the people.

Nirayavagga: Hell personally, i am not sure what can be perceived as 'blind faith' in monks in general is particularly helpful

[hexniks]

This is where Ajahn Brahm's view is similar to a return to the Dark Ages, where priests ruled over society. What is sad is the impression of disempowering laity & creating dependence on monks.

What is absurd about AB's view is, in reality, there are very few monks in the Western cities. For example, in Sydney, Australia's largest city, 7 years ago, there were probably two or three Western monks in the whole city.

If the laity in the big cities are not going to consider themselves as Sangha then what will they regard as Sangha? Some monks living in the forest that regard city life is unworthy?

Sangha, in its essense, represents 'practise'. When people come together & sit together in meditation, that is Sangha.

Hi Element,

I didn't get this impression reading the article. I thought AB's point was that moving away from recognised traditional teachings and to an independant, Western, modernised version of Buddhism can be dangerous if people think that modern = better.

On the other hand, there are lots of modern Western teachers (Joseph Goldstein, Jack Kornfield, Sharon Salzberg, Gil Fronsdal, etc.) who respect and draw on traditional teachings and put them in a modern context.

To be honest, I'm completely ignorant to the current state of Buddhism in Australia, can you expand on your view Element?

[arcaniagainee]

On the other hand, there are lots of modern Western teachers (Joseph Goldstein, Jack Kornfield, Sharon Salzberg, Gil Fronsdal, etc.) who respect and draw on traditional teachings and put them in a modern context.

Yes.

To be honest, I'm completely ignorant to the current state of Buddhism in Australia, can you expand on your view Element?

Well, I see AB's view are utterly baseless & very rude. He said:

Like the young teenagers who delight in doing things differently from their parents, new Buddhists in non-Asian countries seem to be going through their own proud adolescence by challenging the boundaries of traditional Buddhism. Fortunately, for both our youngsters and Western Buddhists, the arrogance of youth soon gives way to the mature, long years of understanding and respect for tradition. It is in order to hasten this growing up of Buddhism in Australia. Firstly, AB seems to have history very wrong above. The relative multitude of monks in Australia is something relatively new.

Second, as I mentioned, I knew of two Western Theravadin monks in Sydney, ten years ago. Now both have acquired their country properties and have left the city. AB's monks don't live in the city, as they regard themselves as forest monks.

So which monks are the city dwellers going to take refuge in as Sangha? In regards to the reality & history of Western Buddhism, as I mentioned, AB appears in contradiction.

There are a number of lay group that have build practise centres in Sydney, including financially. Now AB wants to diminish their merit?

[thehhhyips]

So which monks are the city dwellers going to take refuge in as Sangha? In regards to the reality & history of Western Buddhism, as I mentioned, AB appears in contradiction.

There are a number of lay group that have build practise centres in Sydney, including financially. Now AB wants to diminish their merit? Hmm...I see your point now, thanks for sharing. Luckily, in the UK I don't think there's such a differentiation between city and forest sanghas, as we're such as small country