Not being a follower of any religious belief, I know little of Buddhism. However, having spent a lot of time in both Japan and Thailand, I know many Buddhists who practice with varying degrees of devotion. After 6 years in Japan and having never heard the term 'making merit', I was surprised to see it as a dominant factor in Thai Buddhism. It appeared that in the Japanese brand of the faith, there appears to be no culture of asking favours of their Gods. Again, this seems to be at odds with the local belief.
Perhaps it is simply that the japlanders keep quiet about their practices, perhaps the culture of payoffs infects only the very poor. I am interested to know if it is merely the venality of the thais, or whether the culture of paying for favours is a universal Buddhist practice.
0
Making Merit
Started by Dave9000, 2012-01-20 11:22
|
93 replies to this topic
#2
travelmann
dis-Member Posted 2012-01-21 12:38:21
Those shiny temples dont come cheap u know, still many "gullibles" in Thailand to support them
#3
F1fanatic
Platinum Member Posted 2012-01-21 13:01:59
Most religions subtly assure their followers that giving their church money is a 'good thing'.
The 'making merit' culture is no different - if a bit more obvious. #4
Sing_Sling
Super Member Posted 2012-01-21 13:21:23
It is simply a practice fostered by the religious hierarchy . . . and the masses are gullible.
Burmese, Sri Lankan etc... versions of Buddhism are quite different from the Thai version where smoking, eating meat etc... is acceptable #5
F1fanatic
Platinum Member Posted 2012-01-21 13:40:26
It is simply a practice fostered by the religious hierarchy . . . and the masses are gullible. Burmese, Sri Lankan etc... versions of Buddhism are quite different from the Thai version where smoking, eating meat etc... is acceptable I have to admit that I know nothing of the Burmese, Sri Lankan etc. Buddhism. But somehow I doubt that many of the 'leaders' in religion are genuinely 100% spiritual - with no eye to ensuring their own comfort and power. Let's face it - anyone who was seriously 'spiritual' and un-caring of power would not aspire to high office in the religion and, would never be supported by the current hierarchy. This applies to ALL religions. At least Thai Buddhism is v obvious that if the follower pays money to the temple, they will receive credit in their reincarnation - it will wipe out all their sins  .A bit like the Catholics and 'confession' I guess. #6
pattayadingo
Senior Member Posted 2012-01-21 13:52:14
Most of the Thai women I have been with 'make merit'. Especially on the Buddha holidays or when they visit a temple.
It seems to me that if they are happy and comfortable in doing so there is nothing wrong with it. In fact it might even do them some good psychologically. More than once I have been on my knees and making joint donations - both hands together placing coins in the line of boxes. I tend to go with the flow especially if it makes for a happy relationship 
#7
F1fanatic
Platinum Member Posted 2012-01-21 14:00:24
Most of the Thai women I have been with 'make merit'. Especially on the Buddha holidays or when they visit a temple. It seems to me that if they are happy and comfortable in doing so there is nothing wrong with it. In fact it might even do them some good psychologically. More than once I have been on my knees and making joint donations - both hands together placing coins in the line of boxes. I tend to go with the flow especially if it makes for a happy relationship Yes. It is always a good idea to encourage the belief that giving money wipes out any harm they have caused .
#8
zzaa09
curmudgeonly misanthropic nonpat Posted 2012-01-21 14:22:36
Merit.
Receives a bad rap. #9
sirineou
Senior Member Posted 2012-01-21 19:23:34
it is amazing how many people have an opinion about a subject that they know litle or nothing about.
The Buddhist philosophy, notice how I said philosophy not religion, believes that a person can assent to a higher plane of existence, by living a moral life,making merit is part of that philosophy., Buddhism is an Atheistic Philosophy, , the Siddhartha the Buddha was not concerned with such unanswerable questions ,such as as "is there a God, " and "how do we relate to God" , but was more concerned with suffering in this life, the source of such suffering, and how to alleviate or mitigate such suffering Making merit is a step in that direction .Having said that it is also safe to say that Buddhists are motivate by the same human dynamics that comprise the human condition, and the concept of "Merit" is some times abused by greed or superstition. #10
rgs2001uk
Platinum Member Posted 2012-01-21 19:38:28
^^^^^, from what I have seen many seem to think making merit atones them for their lack of morals.
Does one gain more merit by placing the gold leaf on the front or the back of the staue? Edited by rgs2001uk, 2012-01-21 19:39:11. #11
sirineou
Senior Member Posted 2012-01-21 19:54:40
^^^^^, from what I have seen many seem to think making merit atones them for their lack of morals. Does one gain more merit by placing the gold leaf on the front or the back of the staue? The Buddha believed that the source of all suffering is desire, Merit has no value when motivated by desire for personal gain. Edited by sirineou, 2012-01-21 19:55:14. #12
JurgenG
Super Member Posted 2012-01-21 20:14:03
Based on my (little) knowledge of local Buddhism, making merit is based on the concept of karma, do something good and something good will happen to you.
Making merit doesn't need to involve money. For the birthday of my gf's mother, the whole family went to the monk hospital in Bangkok to bring food for the sick monks who are treated there. Every time we visit the "village" we make sure to wake up early one morning to bring food to the local monastery and chat with the monks. #13
sirineou
Senior Member Posted 2012-01-21 20:34:51
Making merit doesn't need to involve money. For the birthday of my gf's mother, the whole family went to the monk hospital in Bangkok to bring food for the sick monks who are treated there.. My wife buys these turtles that they sell in the market for food and releases them in the lake,where ofcourse the turtle seller re-caches them and sells them to her next week again 
#14
hellodolly
hello dolly Posted 2012-01-21 22:28:08
^^^^^, from what I have seen many seem to think making merit atones them for their lack of morals. Does one gain more merit by placing the gold leaf on the front or the back of the staue? The Buddha believed that the source of all suffering is desire, Merit has no value when motivated by desire for personal gain. Is that why when Thaksin came to Chiang Mai a few years ago to make merit by visiting 99 temples in three days he got nothing. #15
zzaa09
curmudgeonly misanthropic nonpat Posted 2012-01-21 23:09:42
it is amazing how many people have an opinion about a subject that they know litle or nothing about. The Buddhist philosophy, notice how I said philosophy not religion, believes that a person can assent to a higher plane of existence, by living a moral life,making merit is part of that philosophy., Buddhism is an Atheistic Philosophy, , the Siddhartha the Buddha was not concerned with such unanswerable questions ,such as as "is there a God, " and "how do we relate to God" , but was more concerned with suffering in this life, the source of such suffering, and how to alleviate or mitigate such suffering Making merit is a step in that direction .Having said that it is also safe to say that Buddhists are motivate by the same human dynamics that comprise the human condition, and the concept of "Merit" is some times abused by greed or superstition. Well said!! 
#16
sirineou
Senior Member Posted 2012-01-21 23:10:23
^^^^^, from what I have seen many seem to think making merit atones them for their lack of morals. Does one gain more merit by placing the gold leaf on the front or the back of the staue? The Buddha believed that the source of all suffering is desire, Merit has no value when motivated by desire for personal gain. Is that why when Thaksin came to Chiang Mai a few years ago to make merit by visiting 99 temples in three days he got nothing. #17
zzaa09
curmudgeonly misanthropic nonpat Posted 2012-01-21 23:12:46
Is that why when Thaksin came to Chiang Mai a few years ago to make merit by visiting 99 temples in three days he got nothing. For his next life perhaps. #18
fabianfred
Super Member Posted 2012-01-22 03:40:00
as has been said...merit is positive karma ..which brings a positive result. Keeping the five precepts is a way to help prevent us from creating negative karma, which has a negative result.
One can still make merit whilst not bothering to keep the precepts. It isn't like one bank account where we can be either in the red or black but not both because they cancel each other out. Karma is like two accounts, one for red and one for blck and they don't cancel each other out. Therefore we all have both positive and negative karma in our accounts. The merit obtained from giving to animals, even 100 times, is less than the merit from giving to a human, even if it is a person without morals. Giving to a human without morals, 100 times, is less than giving to one who keeps the five precepts just once. Giving to one who keeps the five precepts, 100 times, is less merit than giving to one who keeps the eight precepts, just once. Giving to one keeping the eight precepts, 100 times, is less than one who keeps the ten precepts (Novice). Giving to one keeping the ten precepts, 100 times, is less than giving to a monk keeping 227 precepts. Giving to a monk keeping the 227 precepts who is still Putuchon, 100 times, is less than giving to a Sotapanna. Giving to a Sotapanna, 100 times, is less than a Sakgdagami. Giving to a Sakgdagami, 100 times is less than an Anagami. Giving to an Anagami, 100 times, is less than an Arahant. Giving to an Arahant, 100 times, is less than a Padjekha Buddha. Giving to a Padjekha Buddha, 100 times is les than a Buddha. Giving to a Buddha, 100 times, is less than building a Viharn, Bote, Chedi, Sala, Guti etc. Constructing these buildings, even 100 times, is less merit than teaching Dhamma to those who are ignorant of it. Teaching Dhamma, even 100 times, is less than not getting angry, wanting revenge or to harm any beings, even enemies. Forgiving, even 100 times, is less than keeping the five precepts just once. Keeping the five precepts, 100 times, is less than keeping the eight precepts even just once. Keeping the eight precepts,100 times, is less than keeping the ten precepts just once. Ordaining as a Samanera (novice) keeping the ten precepts, even for 100 years, is less then one who ordains as a monk keeping 227 precepts, even for a single day. Ordaining as a Monk keeping the 227 precepts absolutely unbroken for 100 years, is less than practicing Samatha meditation and making the mind still and quiet (kanika samadhi) for only as long as the flick of an elephant's ear. One who achieves the yana in samatha meditation, even for 100 years, is less merit than one who sees the truth of the three characteristics, (suffering, impermanence and non-self), even if only for a moment. (Vipassana). One who has the wisdom to know the truth about the three characteristics, that this body is only subject to suffering, impermanent and not-self, even for only a moment, as long as the flick of an elephant's ear, is better than one who lives for 100 years but hasn't the wisdom to see the truth. #19
Brucenkhamen
Super Member Posted 2012-01-22 03:44:21
The idea behind it is that if one practises generosity in a sustained way one creates a sense of having more than enough as opposed to having a sense of lack and always wanting more.
However this has become corrupted into a kind of buying ones way into heaven as a cop out rather than following in the footsteps of the Buddha. It's pretty common throughout south east asia but nowhere is it the central practise to the extent that it is in Thailand. I guess it's not so evident in Japan as Japan is more secular humanist, most people don't have much contact with Buddhism except for funerals. #20
Brucenkhamen
Super Member Posted 2012-01-22 03:47:36
The merit obtained from giving to animals, even 100 times, is less than the merit from giving to a human, even if it is a person without morals... Wouldn't it be preferable to give because one wants to support those who have a fulltime commitment to the path, rather than because one wants to accumulate enough points for an upgrade? The way you present it one would need an accountant to keep track. #21
sirineou
Senior Member Posted 2012-01-22 04:02:56
as has been said...merit is positive karma ..which brings a positive result. Keeping the five precepts is a way to help prevent us from creating negative karma, which has a negative result. One can still make merit whilst not bothering to keep the precepts. It isn't like one bank account where we can be either in the red or black but not both because they cancel each other out. Karma is like two accounts, one for red and one for blck and they don't cancel each other out. Therefore we all have both positive and negative karma in our accounts. The merit obtained from giving to animals, even 100 times, is less than the merit from giving to a human, even if it is a person without morals. Giving to a human without morals, 100 times, is less than giving to one who keeps the five precepts just once. Giving to one who keeps the five precepts, 100 times, is less merit than giving to one who keeps the eight precepts, just once. Giving to one keeping the eight precepts, 100 times, is less than one who keeps the ten precepts (Novice). Giving to one keeping the ten precepts, 100 times, is less than giving to a monk keeping 227 precepts. Giving to a monk keeping the 227 precepts who is still Putuchon, 100 times, is less than giving to a Sotapanna. Giving to a Sotapanna, 100 times, is less than a Sakgdagami. Giving to a Sakgdagami, 100 times is less than an Anagami. Giving to an Anagami, 100 times, is less than an Arahant. Giving to an Arahant, 100 times, is less than a Padjekha Buddha. Giving to a Padjekha Buddha, 100 times is les than a Buddha. Giving to a Buddha, 100 times, is less than building a Viharn, Bote, Chedi, Sala, Guti etc. Constructing these buildings, even 100 times, is less merit than teaching Dhamma to those who are ignorant of it. Teaching Dhamma, even 100 times, is less than not getting angry, wanting revenge or to harm any beings, even enemies. Forgiving, even 100 times, is less than keeping the five precepts just once. Keeping the five precepts, 100 times, is less than keeping the eight precepts even just once. Keeping the eight precepts,100 times, is less than keeping the ten precepts just once. Ordaining as a Samanera (novice) keeping the ten precepts, even for 100 years, is less then one who ordains as a monk keeping 227 precepts, even for a single day. Ordaining as a Monk keeping the 227 precepts absolutely unbroken for 100 years, is less than practicing Samatha meditation and making the mind still and quiet (kanika samadhi) for only as long as the flick of an elephant's ear. One who achieves the yana in samatha meditation, even for 100 years, is less merit than one who sees the truth of the three characteristics, (suffering, impermanence and non-self), even if only for a moment. (Vipassana). One who has the wisdom to know the truth about the three characteristics, that this body is only subject to suffering, impermanent and not-self, even for only a moment, as long as the flick of an elephant's ear, is better than one who lives for 100 years but hasn't the wisdom to see the truth.
#22
rockyysdt
Super Member Posted 2012-01-22 07:06:24
as has been said...merit is positive karma ..which brings a positive result. Keeping the five precepts is a way to help prevent us from creating negative karma, which has a negative result. One can still make merit whilst not bothering to keep the precepts. It isn't like one bank account where we can be either in the red or black but not both because they cancel each other out. Karma is like two accounts, one for red and one for blck and they don't cancel each other out. Therefore we all have both positive and negative karma in our accounts. The merit obtained from giving to animals, even 100 times, is less than the merit from giving to a human, even if it is a person without morals. Giving to a human without morals, 100 times, is less than giving to one who keeps the five precepts just once. Giving to one who keeps the five precepts, 100 times, is less merit than giving to one who keeps the eight precepts, just once. Giving to one keeping the eight precepts, 100 times, is less than one who keeps the ten precepts (Novice). Giving to one keeping the ten precepts, 100 times, is less than giving to a monk keeping 227 precepts. Giving to a monk keeping the 227 precepts who is still Putuchon, 100 times, is less than giving to a Sotapanna. Giving to a Sotapanna, 100 times, is less than a Sakgdagami. Giving to a Sakgdagami, 100 times is less than an Anagami. Giving to an Anagami, 100 times, is less than an Arahant. Giving to an Arahant, 100 times, is less than a Padjekha Buddha. Giving to a Padjekha Buddha, 100 times is les than a Buddha. Giving to a Buddha, 100 times, is less than building a Viharn, Bote, Chedi, Sala, Guti etc. Constructing these buildings, even 100 times, is less merit than teaching Dhamma to those who are ignorant of it. Teaching Dhamma, even 100 times, is less than not getting angry, wanting revenge or to harm any beings, even enemies. Forgiving, even 100 times, is less than keeping the five precepts just once. Keeping the five precepts, 100 times, is less than keeping the eight precepts even just once. Keeping the eight precepts,100 times, is less than keeping the ten precepts just once. Ordaining as a Samanera (novice) keeping the ten precepts, even for 100 years, is less then one who ordains as a monk keeping 227 precepts, even for a single day. Ordaining as a Monk keeping the 227 precepts absolutely unbroken for 100 years, is less than practicing Samatha meditation and making the mind still and quiet (kanika samadhi) for only as long as the flick of an elephant's ear. One who achieves the yana in samatha meditation, even for 100 years, is less merit than one who sees the truth of the three characteristics, (suffering, impermanence and non-self), even if only for a moment. (Vipassana). One who has the wisdom to know the truth about the three characteristics, that this body is only subject to suffering, impermanent and not-self, even for only a moment, as long as the flick of an elephant's ear, is better than one who lives for 100 years but hasn't the wisdom to see the truth. On a simplistic level it makes sense, but I suspect there is far more to merit than the unawakened can ever know. I think it's simpler to fill ones heart with Metta and Compassion for all. Ones compassion rather than notion of merit will drive appropriate action. Compassion removes the element of counting the benefit. My heart tells me that to help a small starving family living in squalor and with no prospects, regardless of their knowledge and status, would be preferable to giving to even a Buddha who may already have enough food and water. Receiving from another can be the spark to illuminate the path of those who are in despair and lost. Quite possibly the path of another Buddha or great Sage. After all, we are all potential Awakened Ones. Edited by rockyysdt, 2012-01-22 07:11:04. #23
rockyysdt
Super Member Posted 2012-01-22 07:21:35
To give in order to attract merit only fuels greed and delusion.
On the other hand to be compassionate and to alleviate suffering in others is a selfless act.. To turn outwards to the pain of others, as if their pain is yours, is to truly become selfless, a state in which greed, aversion & delusion diminishes. Merit is a natural consequence of compassion, unlike a deliberate calculated act. Edited by rockyysdt, 2012-01-22 07:24:30. #24
travelmann
dis-Member Posted 2012-01-22 09:19:52
as has been said...merit is positive karma ..which brings a positive result. Keeping the five precepts is a way to help prevent us from creating negative karma, which has a negative result. One can still make merit whilst not bothering to keep the precepts. It isn't like one bank account where we can be either in the red or black but not both because they cancel each other out. Karma is like two accounts, one for red and one for blck and they don't cancel each other out. Therefore we all have both positive and negative karma in our accounts. The merit obtained from giving to animals, even 100 times, is less than the merit from giving to a human, even if it is a person without morals. Giving to a human without morals, 100 times, is less than giving to one who keeps the five precepts just once. Giving to one who keeps the five precepts, 100 times, is less merit than giving to one who keeps the eight precepts, just once. Giving to one keeping the eight precepts, 100 times, is less than one who keeps the ten precepts (Novice). Giving to one keeping the ten precepts, 100 times, is less than giving to a monk keeping 227 precepts. Giving to a monk keeping the 227 precepts who is still Putuchon, 100 times, is less than giving to a Sotapanna. Giving to a Sotapanna, 100 times, is less than a Sakgdagami. Giving to a Sakgdagami, 100 times is less than an Anagami. Giving to an Anagami, 100 times, is less than an Arahant. Giving to an Arahant, 100 times, is less than a Padjekha Buddha. Giving to a Padjekha Buddha, 100 times is les than a Buddha. Giving to a Buddha, 100 times, is less than building a Viharn, Bote, Chedi, Sala, Guti etc. Constructing these buildings, even 100 times, is less merit than teaching Dhamma to those who are ignorant of it. Teaching Dhamma, even 100 times, is less than not getting angry, wanting revenge or to harm any beings, even enemies. Forgiving, even 100 times, is less than keeping the five precepts just once. Keeping the five precepts, 100 times, is less than keeping the eight precepts even just once. Keeping the eight precepts,100 times, is less than keeping the ten precepts just once. Ordaining as a Samanera (novice) keeping the ten precepts, even for 100 years, is less then one who ordains as a monk keeping 227 precepts, even for a single day. Ordaining as a Monk keeping the 227 precepts absolutely unbroken for 100 years, is less than practicing Samatha meditation and making the mind still and quiet (kanika samadhi) for only as long as the flick of an elephant's ear. One who achieves the yana in samatha meditation, even for 100 years, is less merit than one who sees the truth of the three characteristics, (suffering, impermanence and non-self), even if only for a moment. (Vipassana). One who has the wisdom to know the truth about the three characteristics, that this body is only subject to suffering, impermanent and not-self, even for only a moment, as long as the flick of an elephant's ear, is better than one who lives for 100 years but hasn't the wisdom to see the truth. I find this quite shocking and offensive really . The merit obtained from giving to animals, even 100 times, is less than the merit from giving to a human, even if it is a person without morals. #25
camerata
Right Honourable Member Posted 2012-01-22 09:59:02 Quote The merit obtained from giving to animals, even 100 times, is less than the merit from giving to a human, even if it is a person without morals. |
Sponsored by: |
