Monk Ordination Ceremony Costs

[steveboy]

P.S.  You clearly made the comment about Buddhism making money off the deal and now (for what reason, god/Buddha only knows why) you add that the Catholic Church makes (apparently significant) profits by officiating weddings.  While that latter comment is slightly off topic, it's as erroneous as the first comment.

 

I am getting ready to put this issue to rest, even if it is worth discussion, because this is not the place for it.  But before this, I let you see that you have been short on understanding from the start.

 

And here my example of the Catholic church helps, it is perfectly on topic.  The church makes good money with weddings. This would not be bad, the priests need to eat, if it were not for the compulsion behind it.  If you are a Catholic, you are not married unless you marry by the church, following all their impositions.  And you won't be able to marry the person you love, because same-sex marriage is a "sin" in their doctrine.  So the organized religion has taken a power that was never given by its founder, Jesus Christ.   They are the party responsible for making people believe that they need to obey them in order to be married. 

 

And here you see my parallel to the "pre-ordination party".  All I wrote earlier is my opinion that organized Buddhism should not need to make a business out of the initiation of monks. And you surely read the post where a poor family spent 8,000 dollars saved over 15 years to throw your "pre-ordination party" with an expectation of reaching nirvana. IMAGINE what that family could have done for their son with 8,000 dollars!!   They could give him a trade,  a business, a way to make a good living all his life.  Who is the party responsible for making these modest people believe that the blown up $8,000 will benefit the boy, and will bring someone closer to nirvana?  This is surely not what the Buddha taught!

[ChristianPFC]

This and similar questions occasionally asked on the forum obscure the real question which is:

 

What you would boyfriend do in this situation if he hadn't you as a boyfriend?

How would the family raise the money without your help?

Why does he ask you to contribute the major part of the costs?

 

When a Thai boy asks me for money, I remind myself:

"He survived before without my help, he will survive after me without my help, and he would master the current situation without my help"

and then I ponder if the request is reasonable, in which case I will help.

(I had boys asking for money for cigarettes, they get "smoking is dangerous, you might die of cancer" as reply.)

[flugg]

Putting the so right words of christianpfc in another way: you/me/he is just another butterfly passing by, when you/me/he is gone, there will be another you/me/he passing by and I try catching you/me/he in the spiderweb. Play the game or be played.

[emailbroken]

It seems people, rich or poor, would give up almost anything when it comes to religion & beliefs. I, too, am surprised by the high cost of monk ordination in Thailand or Myanmar. It is very similar to the Muslim Mecca pilgrimage or the Catholic Rome pilgrimage whereby the believers had to visit the holy place at least once in their lifetime.

From what I understand of Buddhism, through reading books & attending dharma talks & courses, the believe that by going through monk ordination process will promise nirvana after life is not in line with the principles of Buddhism. Having said that, I wouldn't argue with someone of their beliefs 'cos I know it is pointless. The monk ordination process is important to the Thais and they are happy or someone else is happy to pay for it and that's all that matters.

Just for clarity, in Islam only those who can afford it are expected to make the pilgrimage to Mecca.  In Catholicism, you're not expected to visit any particular place though you're free to do so.

[lukylok]

Still being slightly "off topic" the catholic Church makes far more money with funeral rites, which seem obligatory to many. I have assisted to too many such ceremonies where the priest had no idea at all of the ideas of the defunct and was rising more than a smile in the assistance. It's big business !

[Guest]

The church makes good money with weddings. This would not be bad, the priests need to eat, if it were not for the compulsion behind it.  If you are a Catholic, you are not married unless you marry by the church, following all their impositions.  And you won't be able to marry the person you love, because same-sex marriage is a "sin" in their doctrine. 

There is no compulsion to be a catholic or follow any religion.

So the catholic church should be and are free to charge what they like. 

 

And the consumer is can make his choices and go elsewhere.   I'm pleased to say an ever increasing proportion of the European population have nothing to do with such religions. 

 

As for the dominant religion Thailand, well at least they seem to avoid some of the worst excesses of the world's larger religion businesses.  

[steveboy]

There is no compulsion to be a catholic or follow any religion.

 

It appears to be so, but in a limited way.  Many Muslims are forced to follow their religion.

 

Organized religions influence secular laws to make everyone, believer or not, be subjected to their dictates.

This is the case in my country, where LGBTs have been and are still fighting for our rights.

Even in Thailand you cannot marry your gay lover, as you cannot anywhere in Asia at this time. 

 

Buddhism is a very good philosophy, and as an agnostic I give it the highest marks.

Still the organized religion of Buddhism has been affected by sanctimoniousness and endless rules.

 

I find it positive to stay alert and raise objections to abuses by religions, even being as insignificant as I am, and even if some religious people get all upset over it.  We Americans believe in freedom of speech, even if we are hated for that...  

[Guest buckbee]

Even in Thailand you cannot marry your gay lover, as you cannot anywhere in Asia at this time.

Israel 

 

Israel became the first country in Asia to recognize unregistered cohabitation between same sex couples, making it the only country in Asia to recognize any same sex union thus far. Although same sex marriages are not performed in the country, Israel recognizes same sex marriages performed elsewhere, making it the first and only country in Asia to do so

 

Vietnam

 

On the 1st of January 2015, the 2014 Law on Marriage and Family officially went into effect. It states that while Vietnam allows gay weddings, it will not offer legal recognition or protection to unions between people of the same sex

[steveboy]

Israel

 

Israel became the first country in Asia to recognize unregistered cohabitation...

 

Vietnam

...

 

Israel is a Middle Eastern country that is geographically located on the western edge of the Asian continent.  The term "Asian" does not usually refer to Israelis.  But regardless, you cannot get legally married same-sex in Israel.   Neither can you get legally married same-sex in Vietnam.

 

We gays cannot legally get married anywhere in Asia at this time.  But hopefully this won't last long.

 

Thanks to the US Supreme Court,  I can now go to Asia and pick out a gorgeous young Asian boy, be it a Thai, a Chinese, a Japanese, a Korean... yumm! yummm!...  bring him with me to the US,  and marry him here, and in due time he will become a US citizen.  

 

But I am not a fool to do such thing.  Sex is not everything. I already have a friend who stole my heart. Yet there must be people doing this today, or thinking about doing it tomorrow. 

[faranglaw]

Israel is a Middle Eastern country that is geographically located on the western edge of the Asian continent. The term "Asian" does not usually refer to Israelis. But regardless, you cannot get legally married same-sex in Israel. Neither can you get legally married same-sex in Vietnam.

 

We gays cannot legally get married anywhere in Asia at this time. But hopefully this won't last long.

 

Thanks to the US Supreme Court, I can now go to Asia and pick out a gorgeous young Asian boy, be it a Thai, a Chinese, a Japanese, a Korean... yumm! yummm!... bring him with me to the US, and marry him here, and in due time he will become a US citizen.

 

But I am not a fool to do such thing. Sex is not everything. I already have a friend who stole my heart. Yet there must be people doing this today, or thinking about doing it tomorrow.

 

Did it already in Canada, which was and still is a good fifteen years ahead of the US.

 

My Thai partner and I moved to Canada in 2000, me from the US, he from Thailand. We were admitted as a couple and got our citizenship three years later. We also got legally married. On th tenth anniversary if our legal marriage, in 2013, we celebrated by putting on a true wedding/recommitment ceremony for 45 friends, complete with ballet dancers and a very hot Scottish accordion player in kilts that even the straight men wanted to go home with. Our MCs were our two dearest friends (a straight couple) here in Vanciuver, and the bar man wore the hottest leather pants.

 

Happiness in marriage to a Thai man is possible, but you need luck and some hard work bridging cultural and age differences. It seems that, even now, every day I learn something new about how he thinks about the world. We met when I was 43 and he was 21. Now I'm 66 and he is 44, reading on the couch across from me in our condo living room. Marital bliss is not for everyone, but has worked for me. I'm very lucky. But some of you single guys seem lucky too, and I'm enjoying reading about your exploits and getting a vicarious thrill here and there.

[steveboy]

Did it already in Canada, which was and still is a good fifteen years ahead of the US.

 

My Thai partner and I moved to Canada in 2000, me from the US, he from Thailand. We were admitted as a couple and got our citizenship three years later. We also got legally married. On th tenth anniversary if our legal marriage, in 2013, we celebrated by putting on a true wedding/recommitment ceremony for 45 friends, complete with ballet dancers and a very hot Scottish accordion player in kilts that even the straight men wanted to go home with. Our MCs were our two dearest friends (a straight couple) here in Vanciuver, and the bar man wore the hottest leather pants.

 

Happiness in marriage to a Thai man is possible, but you need luck and some hard work bridging cultural and age differences. It seems that, even now, every day I learn something new about how he thinks about the world. We met when I was 43 and he was 21. Now I'm 66 and he is 44, reading on the couch across from me in our condo living room. Marital bliss is not for everyone, but has worked for me. I'm very lucky. But some of you single guys seem lucky too, and I'm enjoying reading about your exploits and getting a vicarious thrill here and there.

 

Congratulations!  You are a good role model.

 

I know I wrote earlier that "I'm not a fool to do such thing" but my situation is different than yours.  If I were not attached in a kind of relationship and I were twenty years younger I would maybe look into an arrangement like that too. Looks are important, but character should have priority. Someone of good nature, generous, accommodating, thankful.  Mature enough to be beyond all the nonsense of "fidelity", a person who can feel satisfaction if I have a good time with someone else, and who I can feel satisfaction when he has a good time with someone else.  Additional qualities could be to feel attraction for men older than him, to have a disposition to care for a person he loves, free of a demanding family that sticks its nose in his life,  etc.

 

I may be overly ambitions with my list, wanting to get the advantages of being single and married at the same time, having my cake and eat it too,...  but the market of potential candidates could be quite large,  the risks could be large,  so why not expect adequate gains?  It may take quite a bit of work to select among the candidates, but this could be quite pleasurable

Maybe for my next life... 

[ChristianPFC]

"What do I have to do with this?" is exemplified by the following messages on Line I just received:

 

22:17 (Thai friend): Tomorrow i need your help i need 1000 Bath 29 I give you all 2000 Bath
22:17 (Thai friend): Cousin of friend die today

 

(2000 refers to 1000 he borrowed already and another 1000 he wants to borrow, 29 is his pay day 29.04.2016)

The cousin of a friend, half of Thailand qualifies!

But in the past, I got most of my money back (some I probably forgot, but it doesn't matter to me), so I might help him again.

 

But I told him a month ago that I will lend him any further if he shows me how he spent his money (25 kTHB per month, working 10 hours a day and 6 days a week there is not much time to spend that much money, and he doesn't drink or smoke or take drugs; a friends guesses he loses money by gambling), that will be revealing.

[kokopelli]

Still being slightly "off topic" the catholic Church makes far more money with funeral rites, which seem obligatory to many. I have assisted to too many such ceremonies where the priest had no idea at all of the ideas of the defunct and was rising more than a smile in the assistance. It's big business !

As far as the Catholic Church "making money from funerals and weddings" I am not sure exactly what that means? 

That Church or any Church receives a fee for use of facilities and the priest/minister/rabbi would normally receive  a stipend.

 

As for the real cost of funerals/weddings the majority of that is for the funeral director's services and internment and the cost of the wedding festivities, clothing, food and drink.

[zombie]

My boyfriend is planning on becoming a monk short term and had started discussing the costs with me. Initially it was 150,000 but has now jumped to a whopping 300,000. He has not asked me for the full amount but has asked for me to contribute 100,000. If anyone is able to shed light on the costs involved I would be really grateful.

My B/F recently finished as a monk. Over 500 guests attended. Costs that needed to be paid included : invitation cards, pay for food (pigs) and drinks, seating, tents, tables, chairs, music. fees to the monks, costumes (monk apparel) stage, flowers etc etc etc.

 

Cost was around 140,000 baht.

[Gaybutton]

Cost was around 140,000 baht.

 

I'll be foolish and ask.  Who paid?

[zombie]

I'll be foolish and ask.  Who paid?

Mostly paid by B/F's savings and contributions from relatives and friends; plus a decent gift from me too.

All those who attend the ceremony usually give a monetary gift in an envelope which can offset much of the cost.

[steveboy]

As far as the Catholic Church "making money from funerals and weddings" I am not sure exactly what that means? 

That Church or any Church receives a fee for use of facilities and the priest/minister/rabbi would normally receive  a stipend.

 

It simply means that they profit from a market they themselves create.  This is not different from any other business, except that they are supposed to be spiritual institutions.

 

If the probability of success of a marriage would rise with the money spent on the wedding,  or the fate of the diseased would benefit from the money spent on the funeral,  all this would make more sense. 

[kokopelli]

Don't agree with you steveboy. I don't see how the Catholic Church or any other church created a market in dying? Everybody dies! How the family/friends of the deceased decides to celebrate or mourn their passing is up to them. The real big expenses, in a funeral, are items  like a coffin, embalming, interment, flower, and tombstones. Stipend to clergy is minimal. Same goes with weddings.

 

But, as you say, the least spent on funerals and weddings would be better spent on more practical things. Having to settle the estates of several deceased, the cost of clergy is next to nothing compared to lawyer fees and fees for funeral expenses unrelated to clergy.

[steveboy]

Don't agree with you steveboy. I don't see how the Catholic Church or any other church created a market in dying? Everybody dies! 

 

The Catholic church has created several markets with the invention of its sacraments. With these they have infiltrated our lives for power and profit. We all die. Most of us get married.  But this does not mean that a church should get involved in our private affairs.  Since churches have been losing their power today, this is less important today as it was in the past.  Yet I think it is worth of criticism.  Without criticism of the churches we would not have legal same-sex marriage today.

[Bob]

I'm not defending either the Catholic Church (been there, done that) or Buddhism in general as I generally believe that everybody is entitled to their own set of beliefs (even if I think they're all fairy tales); however, it's one thing to rail against the cost of the pre-ordination party or even the costs of weddings and funerals whereas it's quite another thing to rail (falsely) against the temples and the Church for profiting off of those events.  They don't.

 

But it's nice to know that people didn't blow money on weddings and funerals prior to 2000 years ago. 

[steveboy]

...as I generally believe that everybody is entitled to their own set of beliefs (even if I think they're all fairy tales); however, ..... it's quite another thing to rail (falsely) against the temples and the Church for profiting off of those events.  They don't.

 

Surely everyone in this forum agrees that everybody is entitled to their beliefs, whichever they are.  So, why you bring this up if not as a preamble to becoming argumentative?

 

You have no basis to argue that the Church does not profit from weddings and funerals. Of course they do.  And your use of "to rail against" for what is simply a factual observation seems to be your way of blowing things out of proportion.  

 

Churches need to profit from their religious services because their God does not send them money from above, and they have bills to pay.  So it is undeniable that they need to, and in fact do, make profits.  Is this what you don't like to be observed?

 

For me, the problem is not with making (reasonable) money from their services, but the compulsion to force these services for the sole purpose of control.  Marriage in particular is an agreement between the couple that should not involve religion. People don't marry Jesus Christ or Virgin Mary.

[ChristianPFC]

I would guess in civilized/secular countries you can get married and buried or cremated without any involvement of the church.

 

Where and how and how expensive and with or without church, it's all up to you.

 

(I once read about a couple in Germany, they took bus to registry office, answered "Yes" to the relevant question, and then walked back home. No money other the absolute minimum, no church.)

[Guest]

Surely everyone in this forum agrees that everybody is entitled to their beliefs, whichever they are.  So, why you bring this up if not as a preamble to becoming argumentative?.

Everyone is entitled to their beliefs & entitled to not believe any of it.  We are entitled to say that is our personal position. 

Whilst respecting others might hold different view.

 

Despite many of us living in developed countries, with centuries of education, some of us have still suffered some form of religion being imposed upon us at school.  I consider that to be unacceptable in a developed educated society. If people really must engage in religion, it should be in their own time and most certainly never at schools. 

Having suffered that, I will try to balance matters out by speaking out on the matter of religion as and when I choose for the rest of my life.

 

Also, the bishops and all the rest of the religious establishment get access to the media on favourable terms, yet non-believers are expected to remain silent ?  

I cannot accept that. I need to put a little bit back into society.   My conscience will not allow me to remain silent.

[steveboy]

z909, I fully share your position in this matter.

 

Like many others, I was born gay by no fault of my own, in a predominantly Catholic country where homosexuality was condemned mainly because of the position of the Catholic church.  This position reflects its dogma, based on a phrase in the Old Testament and some writings by Apostle Paul in the New Testament.  As a result I was not free to live according to my nature as a young person, and it took me many years to overcome this negative from my original society and religion.

 

However I feel fortunate to be gay.  This gives me a first hand, irrefutable proof from personal experience that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality.   Thus that part of the Catholic dogma must be false.  And here is the important conclusion: since a true religion cannot have parts that are false,  this is one proof that the whole doctrine must be false.  This is a happy confirmation that my comfortable position of agnostic is correct.  I don't have to worry about hell !  

 

It has been tradition that good manners impose a ban on discussions about religion.  The alleged reason is that any criticism of religion can hurt the feelings of believers. On the other hand, believers are free to express their faith with confidence that it will be received with respect, with atheists and agnostics be dammed, forced to keep their mouths shut.

 

I do my best to make the above tradition obsolete, and I am not the only one.  Fair reciprocity requires that both the praise and criticism of religion (and any other topic) have the same standing.  So when some intolerant individuals complain that I say something that is not flattering of religion,  like Bob does here,  they only get me started....  

 

I really think that my insignificant opinions about religion are a contribution to the progressive movement in this era of enlightenment that will put religious fantasies in the place they deserve.  And so, like you wrote, it's a matter of following one's conscience.

[Bob]

That's simply untrue, Mr. Steve, as I could care what unflattering things you have to say about any religion (I've probably said worse); however, there's a difference between making legitimate criticism about Buddhism or Catholicism (or any other religion) and attempting to do it with false information.  You're not entitled to your own "facts."

 

You've claimed Buddhism/temples/monks made money on the ordination deals and that is simply untrue (and you don't support your false claim by questioning why some Thai parents choose to have a big wingding for half the village).  You've also claimed the Catholic Church made money off of weddings and funerals and that's also untrue (Koko's comment above regarding the minimal and voluntary stipend to the officiating priest is quite correct).  

 

As for being "intolerant", I am generally intolerant of posters who blather about topics they know nothing about and then use false information to attempt to back up their supposed position.  At least you're fairly consistent with that problem.