dorjeshugden.com
General Buddhism => General Buddhism => Topic started by: kris on March 25, 2012, 12:30:26 PM
-
I was browsing and found this article quite interesting:
http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=70,9839,0,0,1,0 (http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=70,9839,0,0,1,0)
This article talks about the chief monk of Singapore and Malaysia receive honour of Datukship (equivalent of British Knighthood) in lay clothes. Apparently there are quite a lot of responds that Ven. K. Sri Dhammaratana should not have done it. How about you? What do you think about:
1. Do you think it is ok to receive honour such as Datukship?
2. Do you think it is ok to receive honour in lay clothes?
For me, I felt it is perfectly fine for Venerable to receive the Datukship and he do it in lay clothes (I think it is a custom to wear such outfit). I would say that He is doing it because it will help Him to spread Dharma more easily.
-
If fame, and status help him spread dharma to more people and more easily, then i do not see an issue. Again as with the question of the lay clothes. I think this is fine. We need to break out attachments to the way monks should act, and what they should do. If they help people, whatever they do is fine for me. Take the example of Chogyam Trungpa. Then again you could argue and say that it is not humble of him to receive the award, but he could be trying to be polite, and as long as he can benefit more, i do not see an issue.
-
Personally , I don't think it's is appropriate for a monk to receive this secular recognition with all the pomp and fanfare that it involves . I would like to believe that this monk must have done a great deal of service to the country and society to receive such a royal honour , however as a monk he should have set a good example to Buddhist and non Buddhist alike that he need not receive any recognition for his work.
Even if he did not expect to receive any form of recognition and that it was awarded to him he should have declined as he should have known of all the "necessary" protocol that it involves in receiving the award in the royal court . His action of wearing lay clothes proves to us that he and his office must have done their home work and pondered on what to wear ! And by putting away his robes and donning lay clothes proves only one thing ....that he HIMSELF as the Theravaden chief monk of two countries finds it INAPPROPRIATE to appear in the royal palace to be "knighted" in his yellow robes. Whether or not some protocol officer from the palace to him so or not does not matter as the fact is he did appear in lay clothes.
This is a rare case perhaps the first in the history of Malaysia. I would like to believe also that the sultan or king that was honouring him , knew full well that he is a full fledged monk! And monk hold vows in wearing their robes
for a reason. Being a Multi racial and religious country , every race is given their due recognition in that their respective cultural costumes are accepted as formal wear . Example the cheong sam , sari and Baju melayu .
I would find it disrespectful if one were to expect a monk to don clothes that meets ones protocol needs . Why ? Would the king or sultan who is awarding a monk for his works in the capacity of a chief monk expect him to appear before him in other than his official monk robes ?! Well he did carry out those deeds in his robes and using his position as chief monk and with the backing of the sangha and funds from donations. So , is it so SHAMEFUL to appear as a monk to receive an award on behalf of the sangha (being their chief) and devotees ?
To even accept that as a formality or "condition" says alot about that ordain person. It sends out a inconsistent statement to all people , Buddhist or not .It is not wrong to accept the honour, but the way it was received in this case is not right , to me. Just recall how religious leaders of all faiths in samsara appear in formal events like that of inter-faith meets that is highlighted in the media , does monks and nuns, imams , cardinals and popes appear in a suit or gown ?! They always wear their respective official religious attire proudly no matter what event and who is there . Have u seen the pope greet any kings or presidents in an Armani suit ? Did mother Theresa wear a gown when she is in the presence of heads of states ? These holy individuals did all the good they did in their robes (they also wear them till their funerals) this says alot about their discipline and commitment.
-
The monk’s robe is the official attire of the ordained sangha as laid down in the Vinaya. Different traditions or sects have different types of monk’s robes. Each of these robes is symbolic in nature and has many different meanings. When monks put on their robes, they are basically telling the world they are Lord Buddha’s disciples and have renounced the world. Monk’s robes serve to remind the monks of their monastic vows and their role to uphold Lord Buddha’s teachings.
Now the question is “Is recognition necessary for monks?” Without disrespect to Venerable K. Sri Dhammaratana, in my opinion, if Venerable can use the recognition to further spread Lord Buddha’s teachings, then i feel there is no problem to receive the title.
However, in my opinion, it would have been more appropriate for Venerable to receive the title in his monk’s robes. The protocol committee for the award should have made an exception to Venerable to receive the award in his monk’s robes in official ceremony like this. What is so inappropriate to wear a monk’s robes to receive the award? Is it more beneficial to wear lay clothes for an award than to create uncalled for criticisms (speech karma) on receiving the award in lay clothes?
-
Personally I find is ok to receive the honor in lay clothes. I’m sure that they (the committee) must have a discussion and over again re the appearance before. As long as he had good motivation with the title and can also help to do a lot of good work but most important is in spreading Dharma.
If he is able to hold his monk vow for 45 years, I’m sure he has think it over before receiving the title and find that he can do more if he accepts it so it is ok for me for a monk to receive the title.
-
1. Do you think it is ok to receive honour such as Datukship?
Yes, I think it is perfectly OK for the chief monk to receive Datukship. It is a way that the Malaysia royalty and government showed their respect of what Ven Dri Dhammaratane has done and contributed as a religious leader. It will foster even more inter-religion harmony in a country like Malaysia where Muslim is a dominated religion.
2. Do you think it is ok to receive honour in lay clothes?
I think we tend to criticise what people should wear in any formal occasion. I see it like this. It is very humble for Ven Sri Dhammaratane to wear a traditional suit to receive this honour, he has beern wearing robes all these years, for him to choose to wear a suit and abide to the traditions of receiving Datukship on such an occasion , it just showed how humble a person he is. After this ceremony, isn't he back to his robes?
-
Venerable received his Datukship conferred on him by the government. The title was given in honour of his contribution to the society and if the occassion called for a specific code of attire that did not include attending the ceremony in monk's clothes, Venerable turned up in lay clothes. I think it was very thoughtful of him to do so, so as not to inconvenience the organising department. Anyway, he did not disrobe, just merely changed into lay clothes for a government event.
-
In my opinion, it is alright to receive the title if his motivation is pure and he feels that the award can help him to spread the dharma even better. However, it would be much better if he were to wear his robes to receive the award. I believe that one needs to wear the official attire when receiving the awards. So with due respect to Ven. K. Sri Dhammaratana, he should wear his robes to the event as the official attire of a monk is the monk’s robes. However, it is alright he wore lay clothes on this special event as a sign of respect for the government. He is still a monk whether he is in monk's robe or lay clothes.
-
Personally I do not think a monk or nun should be prohibited from receiving honours such as a knighthood or a "datukship" or even frowned upon for being recognized for his/her work. However, in my humble opinion, it would have been a lot more beneficial for a monk to receive such an award in his robes instead of lay clothes.
Firstly, an ordained person should be seen as being different because by being a monk, he has pretty much renounced his desire for fame unless the said fame is beneficial to his spiritual work. If I monk were to rereive an award in his robes, he is essentially drawing attention to his work as a member of a spiritual community, not as an individual. It is also a tremendous opportunity to put all members of the Sangha in a positive light which will in turn help them further in their work.
To be able to put on a monk's robes in an honour. Why wouldn't a monk want to wear it to represent the Buddha's teachings when in public eye?
Having said that, a highly attained monk will have his reasons and I am giving my opinion as a normal person with little wisdom and insights.
-
I think it is good that Ven received the title in recognition of the beneficial work he has done for the community. It is a clear message to all that Buddhist monks do not just sit down and meditate for personal enlightenment ONLY. This is a positive change of image from being a passive practice to an active and engaging one.
Yes, Buddhist monks should be free from the 8 worldly concerns. However if individual fame will encourage others to be virtuous and walk the path, then the motivation of receiving such recognition is definitely worthy of applaud.
Since the rules imposed at the conferment ceremony are not known, any opinion on Ven's attire is not fair and appropriate.
However, I believe whatever Ven wore for the occasion , he must have had decided with a good and pure motivation.
-
Well.. in my country as it is a Buddhist country so there are so many titles for monk from the Patriarch which is the highest title of monk in country to the head of province, district until the abbot or the temple.. so it quite obviously therefore monks don't take any title as layman use.
For the country that Buddhist is not the main religious like Singapore etc i think its fine for the monk to receive honour for such title as Datukship, i believe that these titles provided to them because they brought great benefit to country and the government would like to offer this honour titles to offer to them.
For the monk to wear layman cloth to receive title, i think that each country have different culture so the monk will make the best decision about it so we could not judge things from what we see only as we don't have wisdom like them.
-
The Chief Monk appearing in lay clothes is due to some protocal. As a Budddhist i think he's being more flexible or neutral on this subject matter. I understand due to this it triggers a lot of opinion and unsettled arguments. But could we just step back and contemplate for a while?
I believed there's a reason on the first place why the Chief Monk accept the title. Perhaps it could really help Him to be able to get things done faster and efficient in the future if should the 'Title' played an important role. As you all know Malaysia is a multi-culture country furthermore is an Muslim country officially. So may I say one of the reason is to prevent unessary opinion from other non-Buddhist brothers and sisters.
We as a Buddhist should be able to cultivate and understand what His motivation are. For the Chief Monk to change and wore a suits and accepted the title on such a secular occasion, in my opinion He's one great master with full of wisdom and humble.
-
I see a lot of debate about what is wrong and right about a Chief Monk in lay clothes receiving an honour. I mean who are we to judge? Are you in his position? Are there any factors that Venerable needs to consider? As a Chief Monk, Venerable knows best what to do. Maybe it is best that he dress in lay clothes for this particular occasion. As long as Venerable motivation is pure to benefit others, I don't see anything wrong by wearing lay clothes for this occasion. That government that offered the honour title may have a dress protocol that needed to be followed. As a Buddhist monk, dressing lay clothes to maintain harmony is an act of humbleness, a true Buddhist Monk. Are we attached to the appearances? Or are we a Buddhist from within or A Buddhist from outside only?
-
Hey I would just like to say is this just a sign of this kaliuga? Of a monk using skillful means to act in accordance to the cultural norms of where he is spreading the dharma... ;D
Is this no different to the titles accorded to HHDL from Mongolian Rulers or for that matter...the Chinese Emperor on DS oracle?
Why the hang-up must be like this...like that..In my humble opinion we restrict the other options that could be more beneficial by having a closed mind on such issues.
Surely the primary concern should always be:
1) Does it help spread the dharma? Credibility in that place.
2) Does it benefit people? YES
3) Does the action harm anyone? If NO then OK.
4) Do we attract more people to the Dharma? With all this debate I am sure it will create interest for more to find out about the point of view on both sides.
Much like this forum and DS.com information resource in the DS ban.
It is much like the representation of the Buddha image being culture specific to places to naturally attract people to the Buddha's teachings. Even though there are many different Buddha images abound - A Buddha is a Buddha irregardless and represents the same thing but in many guises.
Like Buddha images, teachers come in many guises, yogis, scholars, meditators, layman why not a monk for Modern times...Trijang Rinpoche springs to mind in his black suit meeting his HHDL for the first time some years back. Doesn't take anything away from his teachings and legacies that continue today underground for now.
So logically, I think the Cheif Monk has correctly presented the correct response to the situation, time and place for receiving this honour. It's all about the Honour in my view not what the person wears or not wears, to receive an Honour would be based on some positive action - to receive the Honours in the first place.
I would like to say congratulations should be the ONLY respsonse in this situation.
xo
-
Personally, I’m ok for the chief monk to receive Datukship and in lay clothe.
Few aspects to look at these. Receiving Datukship from the Malaysian King is recognition and appreciation from the country/government on Ven. K. Sri Dhammaratana holy work in Malaysia. This is wonderful to me because this really show that Malaysia does give a room for religious harmony in the country.
For Ven. To wear lay clothe, I’m not so particular because it could be due to the respect of the occasion (probably). In our Buddhist practice we always think for others and the consideration is always to a long term benefits. I believe for Ven. K to wear lay clothe for the ceremony has been discussed.
I’m very much rejoice for the recognition. This really shows the good faith of Buddhism in Malaysia. It does open my eye on Malaysia which uses to think of a strict Muslim country.
-
‘When ordinary people praise the Buddha, they do so only on the trivial and petty grounds of mere behavior.’
The Buddha, Brahmajala Sutta, Digha Nikaya 1
Quoted from above,
The Buddha makes a strong point about how people will tend to blame or criticize based on trivial details of external behaviour, ignoring that which is of true value.
The Buddha was very clear on this, and always kept a sense of ethical perspective.
Sadly, we Buddhists have become so attached to the externals of our religion that we tend to judge and condemn someone who has spent a life in service to the dharma based on such a trivial thing.
To me, if there is nothing immoral about wearing a suit. It doesn’t harm anyone. There are real, genuine moral issues facing us every day, and as Buddhists get used to simply living as if they passed us by. But a suit!
-
I find this article somewhat sad because this shows that the people of Malaysia, and the Buddhist council of Malaysia who consists of lay people think that they can criticize monks. No doubt that the he also happens to be the nephew of the former chief monk of Malaysia and thus have certain expectations to follow, but to make a big fuss out of this as if they have authority over sangha is extremely sad indeed for 1) they do not hold the monk vows, so they do not have the right to criticize a sangha member 2) they have not renounced anything in their lives to qualify to have the right to criticize a fully ordained monk. This shows how little Dharma does the lay people of malaysia know and how insecure they are about their own Dharma practice as only insecure people see the need to police others. Any practitioner that is strong, stable and sure of their own Dharma practice will not see a need to make such statements or actions against others. It is also very obvious that they do not study much Dharma but wishes to govern others anyway. if they did they would have learnt that criticizing sangha can bring about very heavy consequences as it is the same as criticizing the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. An ordained person represents the Buddha via the robes, embodies the Dharma and is the sangha support for the disciples, so to criticize an ordained person is to deny being Buddhist.
I am just a lay person and as such I have very little knowledge of the monk’s vinaya. Nevertheless, I wish to know that by not wearing his robes, did he break any of the monk’s rules of conduct?
I was also informed that even if there was minor breach of the rules, there need to be some sort of confession between the venerable and his brother monks. How is this being handled?
people who wish to criticize do not even know if an ordained person is allowed to wear lay clothes or not, and they end up feeling shocked or horrified or whatever. If you dont know about the vinaya rules, go find out. there are books about it that can be bought from Buddhist bookstores or ordered online. If I were you i'd shutup and keep my assumptions to myself instead of posting such a stupid article on the net and cause more misunderstandings to people. Yeah so, ratana acted against your expectation and thats his only 'mistake', but i dont think it warrants a lay person to make such comments against an ordained person. After all, the ordained person holds at all times more vows than your measly 5.
And since the venerable will place the honorific “Datuk” title in his name card, will he also put the photo of him receiving the award from the Malaysian King in his office or anywhere inside the compound of the temple where he currently resides?
My question is why would you expect a monk to act only in the way that you want? If a monk is recognized by the government of a certain country fro their achievements, why is it wrong for that monk to accept this award? Why are people so hung up on this? I dont see anything wrong. Apparently, Rev Ratana is operating and running an ophranage and old folks home as well as a shelter for single mothers and the head of the malaysian government is recognizing him for that. The tone of the comment represents the jealousy of the author of that article towards Rev Ratana who received the award. If he was not jealous, would he actually say something like this? Is there even a need to say this? Since when do monks carry name cards? My word!! what an insolent person this is! Shocking how people can bad mouth sangha like this in malaysia. What a nightmarish country for Buddhism to be in!
It is things like this that make my blood boil: lay people criticizing the sangha as if they know everything.
-
Personally, I think that the chief monk should wear robes to receive this award as representation of sangha communities. This award is given to him in recognition of his works and all his life as a monk he has been wearing the robes, so I could not fully comprehend why he chose to wear a traditional suit to receive this honour. As a monk, his traditional suit should be his robes. But having said that, whether he is in a suit or a robe does not play a significant part as long as his motivation to spread the dharma and bring benefits to others is pure.
-
Come on guys, who are we to say what is right or wrong for a monk to receive an award-ship in lay clothes? Isn't it the same as someone saying that HHDL is wrong for banning Dorje Shugden practice but HHDL has His reasons of which SOME of us have different opinions. Aren't they the same? Maybe Chief Sangha Nayaka of Malaysia and Singapore have bigger reasons for receiving this award as well? :o
To whom do the Chief Sangha Nayaka of Malaysia and Singapore report his vows to? You, me or His Guru? He has His vows and He answers to the 3 Jewels and I am very sure that His motivation is pure for doing so.
Probably the government asked him to do so? Maybe its a standard protocol that the government set? ;D
http://www.malaysianmonarchy.org.my/malaysianmonarchy/?q=en/dresscode (http://www.malaysianmonarchy.org.my/malaysianmonarchy/?q=en/dresscode)
-
I am just a lay person and as such I have very little knowledge of the monk’s vinaya. Nevertheless, I wish to know that by not wearing his robes, did he break any of the monk’s rules of conduct?
I don't know anything about the monk vows as well but I think one of the many general Buddhist conduct is to be humble at all times and respect other religions, ethnics and cultures. My great teacher also told me before that by being a Buddhist practitioner, we must have respect towards the government and always abide the law, which is the same as respecting our guru / elders and holding our vows. Relating to this situation on Venerable receiving the title, I can only say that Venerable dons a lay suit at the ceremony out of respect for the Malaysian King.
Do you think it is ok to receive honour such as Datukship?
Personally I don't see the harm in receiving a title for the recognition of his hard work. I've read that Venerable took his monk vows when he was 17 and is very well known in Malaysia for his missionary work. Such titles can be easily abused in the secular world but since Venerable is a holy man, I'm sure he will put this title to good use in spreading the Dharma more efficiently.