Mr. G wrote: ↑
Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:09 pm
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 12590/full
It is an old philosophical idea that if the future self is literally different from the current self, one should be less concerned with the death of the future self (Parfit, 1984). This paper examines the relation between attitudes about death and the self among Hindus, Westerners, and three Buddhist populations (Lay Tibetan, Lay Bhutanese, and monastic Tibetans). Compared with other groups, monastic Tibetans gave particularly strong denials of the continuity of self, across several measures. We predicted that the denial of self would be associated with a lower fear of death and greater generosity toward others. To our surprise, we found the opposite. Monastic Tibetan Buddhists showed significantly greater fear of death than any other group. The monastics were also less generous than any other group about the prospect of giving up a slightly longer life in order to extend the life of another.
In fact I am not surprised by such discovery... monasteries, wherever they are, Tibet, East Asia or South Asia, are places of considerable professional career. In the course of time one may win a lot, position, money etc. These things are strongest of 5 desires. And there is comparatively little life burden or social burden. If they live without sex, then there is no family to take care of.. of course there are relatives, and as monastics we may help them, but still it is not own family. And if they havve sex, then it is in secret.. so still no responsibility.
People who make professional career as religious persons are used to take or - more politely - receive, and expect others to give! not to give to them but to get from them yes it is kind of trade, I pray, you pay..
On the other hand many lay people are disillusioned about life and themselves, they fear death and resposnsibility of own acts, and often guard themselves much better.. society is help for them, since society is very harsh judge. Own family is even harsher no way to escape.. bu monks? they are often crooked, very bad characters hidden behind position and robes. They are revered whether they are stupid or not, honest or dishonest etc.. one with personality problems could be also a monk, right? But still receives all benefits from lay people.
Monks may keep corporate frame-up, and it hardly helps them to be pure in their hearts.. Lay people are sinners in common sense, but cannot keep high air about themsleves.. so they could be in a way much more yielding and generous, if take seriously to heart some teachings.
But richer lay followes? more problems one sees with them.. they try often to use money to get position and recognition in religion, then they use religion for upgrading desire of fame... there ar e lots of people like this.. Material and social position, lay or monastic, does not help to reach
"the denial of self associated with a lower fear of death and greater generosity toward others".
To think of monastics as those who reached denial of self is simply a fairy tale for kids.
Of course there are good monks, but very few... in terms of percentage I think one digit number.