It has been a long while since I started a new thread. But I hear insinuations that the quality of AF has dropped and whenever I comment on something rational and founded in the Dhamma, as long as it sounds like a criticism of certain people who are allegedly monks, I get strange criticism.

So let me set the record straight and try to do my humble bit to boost the qualify of AF as a Buddhism forum. I will set down why I don't respect every monk and the reasons for my belief.

The Historical Sangha

To understand what is meant when we refer to the Sangha and the members of the Sangha, we need to understand why the Sangha was established.

When the Buddha was enlightened, he went to see the 5 ascetics and gave them his first teaching, the Dhammacakkapavatthana Sutta. At the end of this, the ascetic KOndanna understood the Dhamma and asked the Buddha for ordination.

So Kondanna became the first bikkhu and when the other 4 ascetics had ordained, there was a Sangha. At this stage, the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha were now in existence.

When the 5 bikkhus became arahants later, there were 6 arahants in the world including the Buddha. Thereafter, it was Yasa and 54 of his friends subsequently also ordained and they all became arahants. There was therefore 61 arahants in the world and it was to this Sangha of 61 arahants that Buddha gave the famous instructions for the Sangha to go forth and teach the Dhamma.

His opening words were:

I, bikkhus, am freed from all snares, both celestial and mundane
And you, bikkhus, are freed from all snares, both celestial and mundane

From his opening words, it is clear that the Buddha was not addressing bikkhus in general. He was speaking to a Sangha of Arahants: bikkhus who had done what had to be done.

As time passed, more and more people would take refuge in the Triple Gems and it was not convenient for them to seek out the Buddha for ordination. The Buddha then allowed the Bikkhus to ordain a man and he gave instructions. They must then utter the famous words taking refuge in the Triple Gem, and by doing so, accept the Buddha as the teacher, the Dhamma as the teachings and the Sangha as the role model.

What is a Bikkhu

The Buddha explains clearly that the robes, the bowl and the shaven head alone do not make the Bikkhu. It is only the practice of the Dhamma which makes the Bikkhu, makes the samanna. The holy life is the bhikku's life because it is lived for the complete end of suffering.

So a person is granted ordination by the Bikkhu Sangha for the attainment of Nibbana, which is the comlete ending of suffering and this is accomplished by understanding and practising the Dhamma. It is only through the Noble Eightfold Path, comprised of sila (morality), samadhi (concentration) and panna (wisdom) that one attains Nirvana through the destruction of lust, hatred and delusions.

And therefore a Bikkhu's sila comprise of 227 precepts and a Bikkhu must observe and respect all the rules of the Vinaya. The Vinaya is fundamental and failure to observe and respect the Vinaya means a Bikkhu cannot attain Nibbana.

This then is the definition of the Bikkhu.

Why I do not respect every person who appears to be a monk

So in short, my answer is this: It is not sufficient for a person to have shaved his head, put on yellow robes and has the bowl. This outward appearance does not make one a monk nor a member of the Sangha. A person is a member of the Sangha only when he observes the sila with all 227 precepts, observes and respects the Vinaya and lives a holy life with only the objective of seeking Nibbana. Then and only then is a person a true Bikkhu and a member of the genuine Sangha.


PS: The whole article is mine, not copied, not reproduced and all copyright is mine except for free distribution, which permission is given unreservedly