Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: more about my experiences at Pune

Expand Messages
  • Ong Yong Peng
    Bhante, thank you. Neither was the Buddha a republican. ;-) Actually, I am fairly interested in the kind of topics you discussed, not what I would hear in
    Message 1 of 4 , Mar 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Bhante,

      thank you. Neither was the Buddha a republican. ;-)

      Actually, I am fairly interested in the kind of topics you discussed, not what I would hear in general public talks. Which is why I am interested in private research and study.

      The unique points as I understand are:

      1. the Sangha is (or is supposed to be) a democratic-style assembly.
      2. there are political entities during Buddha's times which were republics, but built upon a deeply-rooted caste system, i.e. having a ruling caste.

      metta,
      Yong Peng.


      --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, ashinpan wrote:

      So throughout my lecture, I argued that the Buddha was not a democrat as popularly conceived.
    • ashinpan
      Dear Yong Peng ... As for (1), I think Sangha cannot be called a democratic institution. Because: 1. At Sangha functions (so-called sanghakammas), the
      Message 2 of 4 , Mar 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Yong Peng
        You wrote:

        > The unique points as I understand are:
        >
        > 1. the Sangha is (or is supposed to be) a democratic-style assembly.
        > 2. there are political entities during Buddha's times which were republics, but built upon a deeply-rooted caste system, i.e. having a ruling caste.

        As for (1), I think Sangha cannot be called a democratic institution. Because:
        1. At Sangha functions (so-called sanghakammas), the objection of a single monk can overrule the majority vote. (In other words, each monk carries a veto.) So any given function can succeed only if each and everyone present in the assembly gives their agreement.
        2. On the other hand, as long as one thinks he is right, he needn't follow the majority; a dhammavaadii (who upholds the dhamma) is a dhammavaadii, whether he is in the minority or in the majority.
        3. If a group of monks cannot reach agreement over a controversy, they must live separately.

        Of course such regulations cannot be adopted in a lay society.

        with metta

        Ven. Pandita
      • Ong Yong Peng
        Bhante and Gunnar, thank you for your sharing. Yes, it requires the understanding of the Vinaya rules relating to monks assembly to determine if the Sangha is
        Message 3 of 4 , Mar 2, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Bhante and Gunnar,

          thank you for your sharing. Yes, it requires the understanding of the Vinaya rules relating to monks' assembly to determine if the Sangha is democratic to today's standards. Vinaya is an area I am not familiar with.


          metta,
          Yong Peng.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.