CRUEL MONKS (II): Monastics slandering, insulting, harming or trying divide laywomen in their communities and what the Buddha taught about repairing it

“When such behaviour happens repeatedly—particularly among senior monk teachers, who frankly should know and behave better—a layperson is permitted to make a formal “proclamation of no confidence” in a monk who behaves in this way, whoever that monk may be.”

Personal Experience: Insults by Monastics

During my time as a Buddhist follower, scholar and practitioner, I have often experienced slander, insults, two-faced hypocrisy, sexism and misogyny from worldly laypeople. That is saṃsāra, and we know that people—even those who call themselves Buddhists—are full of faulty views, negative afflictions and self-centred duality.

However, there have also been occasions when monastics—mainly men—have insulted me in derogatory or harmful ways. This has happened directly, through such abuse as calling me a “bitch” or a “dog,” and through threats to kill me or perform black magic against me. It has also happened behind my back, with monastics telling other laypeople that I am “a troublemaker” and that they should avoid me.

As I have said before, these are all examples of wrong speech and gossip, which should generally be abandoned. This is especially so when people discuss your perceived faults with others but make no attempt to address or resolve those concerns with you directly in a helpful, friendly or constructive way.

Because this has happened to me—even senior monastic tulkus have spoken about me and others negatively and derogatorily within the community. Such as Gyalton Rinpoche whom I acidentally overheard speaking on a Whatsapp message to an Indonesian male administrator (I had only just met) telling him “I was a trouble-maker”. I was shocked that someone I had taken to be kind, compassionate, loving and a source of wisdom and refuge and had taken Vajrayana empowerments from would speak behind my back in such a way, and not to me directly. I decided to forget about it though, and continued to try and view him in a positive way, which in hindsight was a mistake. It seems like he was emulating the conduct of his own teacher though.

In 2018, a long-time female follower of the 12th Tai Situ Rinpoche, who still stays at Sherab Ling Monastery ,[1] told me a few years ago that Tai Situpa himself had agreed with her that another Asian woman, who had been staying in retreat at the monastery for a long time, is “toxic.” The woman who related this to me said that Tai Situpa’s comment confirmed her own opinion of the other woman and effectively gave her the green light to avoid and bad-mouth her—and to tell people such as me how “toxic” she was. I told her that I was shocked and saddened that any senior monk or tulku teacher would speak like that about a laywoman behind her back to another laywoman and that I did not consider this to be a positive thing, even then!

In my own case, the monks who insulted me used derogatory, sexist and misogynistic language, as well as threats of violence and intimidation, mainly came from Benchen Monastery in Nepal, and Sherab Ling Monastery in India.  Yet, when I complained to the monastic administrations about this speech and the monks’ alleged breaches of Vinaya in their verbal aggression and treatment of a lone woman, I was treated as though I were the problem. I wonder whether monks in senior administrative roles are even aware of the Vinaya rules governing such conduct.

After all, laywomen and laymen are regarded as two equal pillars of the fourfold Buddhist community, and historically they were the sole source of material sustenance for monastics. Now, however, with huge monasteries and massive bank accounts, some monastics appear to regard their institutions as self-serving and superior entities in their own right, even invoking their own specific “worldly”—rather than Dharma—protectors to preserve their “power.”

This short article examines what Shakyamuni Buddha taught about monastic interactions with laypeople in relation to insults and slander. It also considers why a monastic who behaves in this way is supposed to be formally ordered by the community to apologise to, and seek forgiveness from, the layperson they have insulted.

Contemporary conduct of this kind is far removed from what Shakyamuni Buddha taught and intended. Originally, monastics were not even supposed to receive money or possess bank accounts.

This helps to explain why the phenomenon of cruel and abusive monks appears to be becoming more prevalent—and why these examples may be only the “tip of the iceberg.” It is also why I am “not holding my breath” while waiting for an apology that may never come.

When such behaviour happens repeatedly—particularly among senior monk teachers, who frankly should know and behave better—a layperson is permitted to make a formal “proclamation of no confidence” in a monk who behaves in this way, whoever that monk may be.

For a short reel I made today about this topic see here,  and also on other reels “Why insults are best avoided and how to change the urge to insult”. and “Why Gossip is negative speech and how to transform it”.

In the next Cruel Monks III article, I write about the misuse of tantric rituals to intoxicate women and extract sexual and emotional life energy from them for their own benefit and long-life, and how the roots of the cruel and misogynist treatment of women and children, can be discovered in the Dob-Dob abusive culture that dominated Tibet when the Gelugpas took over with the Mongolian military.

Vinaya monastic rules on protocols between monastic and laypeople communications

The Origin Story: The Khandhaka (Cullavagga, Chapter 1)

The legal procedure for this rule—known as Paṭisāraṇiya-kamma (an Act of Reconciliation)—originates in the Cullavagga.

The Story: A monk named Venerable Sudhamma became jealous of a highly devout and wealthy lay disciple named Citta the Householder. When Citta invited other senior monks for a meal but left Sudhamma out of the initial planning, Sudhamma publicly insulted and jeered at Citta’s hospitality.

The Judgment: Citta was deeply offended. When the Buddha heard about the incident, he heavily rebuked Sudhamma for weaponizing his status and destroying the faith of a lay disciple. The Buddha then laid down a mandatory legal procedure: the Sangha must formally order any monk who slanders or insults a layperson to return to that layperson and humbly ask for their forgiveness.

Endnotes