Jump to content

Attitudes to ex-monks.


Recommended Posts

What are general Thai lay peoples views on ex-monks? Is it seen as negative to have been a monk, but then having returned the ordination/vows. According to the Vinaya, it’s fine to return vows, and retake, up to five times in one lifetime, but social attitudes are not always based on scriptural or clerical authority. In Himalayan Buddhist society giving up monasticism is looked down on and can bring collective shame on a family, whilst at the same time Tibetan women see ex-monks as potentially good husbands who are less likely to be drunk and abusive.

 I’m talking about ex-monks as in those who have taken higher or “real” ordinations, not temple boys.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost all Thai men will ordain at one point in their lives. When a relative dies, when they are of a particular age, etc. This is a temporary ordination, lasting from a single day (for a funeral) to a few years. The longer you ordain, the more you are seen as having good qualities. But you're not looked down on for not staying in the Sangha, just revered if you do. If you are disrobed, obviously there's some stigma to that. But I've never come upon any kind of misgivings or side eyes or gossip about anyone leaving the monkhood after having spent time, even significant time, in it.

  • Like 1
  • The Greatest 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
On 7/14/2020 at 3:01 AM, Midlifecrisisguy said:

What are general Thai lay peoples views on ex-monks? Is it seen as negative to have been a monk, but then having returned the ordination/vows. According to the Vinaya, it’s fine to return vows, and retake, up to five times in one lifetime, but social attitudes are not always based on scriptural or clerical authority. In Himalayan Buddhist society giving up monasticism is looked down on and can bring collective shame on a family, whilst at the same time Tibetan women see ex-monks as potentially good husbands who are less likely to be drunk and abusive.

 I’m talking about ex-monks as in those who have taken higher or “real” ordinations, not temple boys.

I would respect the hell out of one if I met him or her. Huge character. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

In Thailand, it’s pretty normal for men to become monks for a while and then leave. I know a few people who’ve done it, and nobody really thinks less of them for it. It’s often part of a tradition or something they do for personal reasons, and once they leave, they just go back to regular life. People tend to respect that they spent time in the monkhood, even if it wasn’t forever. It’s not looked down on, like in other places. In fact, some see ex-monks as more grounded or disciplined, so it’s not a negative thing at all from what I’ve seen.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Most Recent Topics

  • Latest Comments

    • Speculatively, it seems likely that the real "warfare roots" of ring Muay Thai goes back to all the downtime during siege encampment, (and peacetime) Ayutthaya's across the river outer quarters. One of the earliest historical accounts of Siamese ring fighting is of the "Tiger King" disguising himself and participating in plebeian ring fighting. This is not "warfare fighting" and goes back several hundred years. One can imagine that such fighting would share some fighting principles with what occurred on the battlefield, but as it was unarmed and likely a gambling driven sport it - at least to me - likely seems like it has had its very own lineage of development. Less was the case that people were bringing battlefield lessons into the ring, and more that gambled on fighting skills developed ring-to-ring. In such cases of course, developing balance and defensive prowess would be important.  Incidentally, any such Ayutthaya ring-to-ring developments hold the historical potential for lots of cross-pollination from other fighting arts, as Ayutthaya maintained huge mercenary forces, not only from Malaysia and the cusp of islands, but even an entire Japanese quarter, not to mention a strong commercially minded Chinese presence. These may have been years of truly "mixing" fighting arts in the gambling rings of the city (it is unknown just how separatist each culture was in this melting pot, perhaps each kept to their own in ring fighting).
    • For anyone who follows my writings I do not argue for any sense of a "pure" Muay Thai, or even Siamese fighting art history. Quite different than such I take one of Siam and Thai strengths is just how integrative they have been over centuries of development (while, importantly, preserving its core identity). For instance Western Boxing has had a powerful influence upon the form and development of Muay Thai for well over 100 years, and helped make it perhaps the premiere ring fighting art in the world, but Western Boxing itself was a very deep, complexly developed art which mapped quite well upon traditional Muay Thai in many areas, allowing it to flourish. This is quite different than the de-skilling that is happening in the sport right now, where instead the sport is being turned towards a less-skilled development, for really commercial reasons.  The story of whether the influx of attention, branding, not to mention the very important monetary investment that Entertainment Muay Thai has brought will actually help "save" traditional Muay Thai is yet to be written. It very well might, as the sport was reaching some important demographic and cultural dead-ends, and it needed an infusion. But, let's not have it be lost, what itself is being lost, which is the actual very high level of skill Thailand had produced...and how it had developed it. Let's keep our eye on the de-skilling.
    • One of the more slippery aspects of this change is that in its more extreme versions Entertainment Muay Thai was a redesign to actually produce Western (and other non-Thai) winners. It involved de-skilling the Thai sport simply because Thais were just too good at the more complex things. Yes, it was meant to appeal to International eyes, both in the crowd (tourist shows) and on streams, but the satisfying international element was actually Western (often White) winners of fights, and ultimately championship belts. The de-skilling of the sport and art was about tipping the playing field hard (involving also weigh-in changes that would favor larger bodied international fighters). Thais had to learn - and still have to learn - how to fight like the less skilled Westerners (and others). In some sense its a crazy, upside-down presentation of foreign "superiority", yes driven by hyper Capitalism and digital entertainment, but also one which harkens back to Colonialism where the Western power teaches the "native" "how its really done", and is assumed to just be superior in Nature. The point of fact is that Thais have been arguably the best combat sport fighters in the world over the last 50 years, and it is not without irony that the form of their skill degradation is sometimes framed as a return to Siam/Thai warfare roots. It's not. Its a simplification of ring fighting for the purpose of international appeal. 
  • The Latest From Open Topics Forum

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      1.4k
    • Total Posts
      11.6k
×
×
  • Create New...