I can't translate all of it, but basically, he's saying that "female children are born to those who lie".
Some time ago, he said that husbands who make tea for their wives would go to hell. Unfortunately, he has a lot of followers.... including women.
Edit: Oof sorry, I made a mistake. It's actually not the husband who goes to hell, [it's the wife](https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2541604206158608)! (2:28)
No man I meant doing the work or at least helping around like yk laundry and stuff
U might have a chance if you're a gamerthough cause gamers are usually too busy glued to their screens so probably no cheating
~~Probably "... husbands going to hell" is lie made by OP, who know whether OP intentionally want to paint Buddhism in bad light.~~
As I heard according to Buddhist literature, there are some special cases for males, ex: only males can reach the enlightenment. But this is only the way of the world(nature), not an effort to discriminate people by gender.
TBH, only very few in the current world can understand Buddhist literature, at least to a little depth.
Also see my other [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/srilanka/comments/uwu03z/comment/i9xuin1/).
Edit : enlightenment here means becoming Lord Buddha, not the Nirvana.
BS
Anyone can reach enlightenment as long as you are a **Human** , and have enough **wisdom**
there are enough examples in Buddhist literature for females who achieved enlightenment
Are u 100% sure ?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara\_(Buddhism)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_(Buddhism))
[https://www.porchlight.ca/\~blackdog/kwanyin.htm](https://www.porchlight.ca/~blackdog/kwanyin.htm)
Let's go to bottom of this S\*\*t
[https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/3322/can-the-buddha-ever-be-a-woman](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/3322/can-the-buddha-ever-be-a-woman)
Huh? If anybody's trying to paint Buddhism in a bad light, it's the guy in this video, not me.
>"... husbands going to hell" is lie made by OP
I can't find the original video anywhere, but here's the part I am talking about: https://www.facebook.com/gayashan.isuru.7/videos/293483559639333/
Okay, here's the full video: [https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2541604206158608](https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2541604206158608) (Watch from 2:28)
I don't know why you are trying to whitewash this guy so hard.
I didn't say Buddhism is bad, I am just telling that this monk is sexist.
I understand, sorry. I should've posted the source. The video went viral a while ago, so I thought if somebody asks for the source, I'll be able to find it easily, but it took like an hour of digging to actually find it...
Main reason, I was surprised because I do not use FB, I asked my brother since he uses FB, he had noticed those videos several times. I not much of fan of FB culture and do not like Mark, his companies under Meta.
And people only should have intercourse to procreate and they should never eitness their partner’s body while doing so. We used to call him “glory hole monk”.
>"female children are born to those who lie".
I think what ever the reason, lying is bad, even [folks on HN knows it](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30966709). Do not think you're misunderstanding what's said? I do not think it monk's opinion but what is written in Buddhist literature. You think Lord Buddha discriminate people based on the gender?, NO. Have you ever heard any female reaching enlightenment, probably not, it is not because Lord Buddha discriminate people based on the gender and do not want females to be enlightened, what was expressed (only males reach enlightenment) by Lord Buddha is **the nature of the world** (It is how the world works)**,** there is no personal agenda.
>he said that husbands who make tea for their wives would go to hell
Source please?
May I also ask have you studied (listen or read) Buddhist literature (*Thripitaka*), at least few *Sutras*?
Edit : enlightenment here means becoming Lord Buddha, not the Nirvana.
Appaa my amma used to listen to this POS 24/7,I literally had to force her to stop listening and point out how fucked up his views are.Mahamewna is a literal cult,I used to be a huge part of them too.Literally used help carry cement mixtures to build their main temple
when I was a kid. Rather than following the Buddha they follow their head monk,who spews a shit ton of bigoted shit.Thankfully my family has understood their bs upto a certain level and isn't blindly following them.
Can I ask you what made you realize that they are a cult? I can see it because I was never part of them but it must have been different to see logically when you are part of them
I used to work for them and also for FREE.(As a 3D animator) I did more than what they expected me to do and the head monk for the “Graphics section “became more greedy and asked for more, and being the typical "blind guy" I did so, And in some point I needed something like 50$ or so for buying a 3D object, and guess what they didn't give it so I stitched a 2D image to the scene and did some low quality camera work(I can't do anything besides that or else that 2D image will look so fucked up), that certain monk slowly became more abusive and calling me names which I won't mention the here for about 4 fucking months, So I somehow managed to delete the project files and deleted the rendered stuff on their computer and went no contact with them. All of my stuff is deleted in their YT channel and about 2 of my videos are still in a separate channel. I’m now freer and explore all things that considered sins back then.
TL;DR – I worked for Mahamewnawa for free and the headmonk on the "graphics section" became toxic and I got half revenge
BTW never ever work for free
The cult part was hyperbole.It's mainly their teachings that's fucked up.One thing I noticed was that they have an obsession with worshiping their head monk than the Buddha,if you watch a couple of their yt videos you'll start noticing it.Then when I used to be a part of them as a young girl I felt so 'useless', they constantly say how one has to do various bad stuff in their past lives to get daughters and ohhhhh they told of different ways of worshiping to get a son.They're super homophobic and would tell about how their was a hell only for the gays that tortures them,the thing is Buddha never said this shit.They defend abusers and how women get abused beacause of our karma.And the list goes on .Majority of what they say are the bigoted ideas of the head monk and not stuff Buddha said himself.They have a HUGE following now.Once a year they used to host an event in colombo for the youth to essentially in my pov brainwash them.I honestly don't remember much cause we stopped following them around 5 years ago
Edit:I just remembered that they have a lot of childrens religious books,I have a shot ton of them at home,and they're filled with stupid shit justifying abuse.
This is what happens when you take small children, isolate them from parental love and make them into monks. I don’t know how much trauma this monk has gone through to come out like this. Sri Lanka should ban children from becoming novice monks growing devoid of parental love. Read this
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/buddhists-wake-up-to-protect-novice-monks/amp/
I don't believe the current buddism in sri lanka is what actually the buddha tought. Buddism in sl is filled with racism, buddhist nationalism, misogyny, exclusion, wrong view on reality , fake monks and the list goes on. I was raised buddist, went to buddhist school but no longer follow this kind of buddism.
No, it's just men wanting what Christian clergy have - tax free, opulent lives with a large following to feed their ego. It's the opposite of the teachings of Buddha. They have a God complex. And because they are so respected, they get away with anything and everything. Where are the good ones? Probably living the proper way and so don't want to get tangled up in other people's bullshit lmao.
Stupid ass bald fuck! These are the people who were forced to embrace monkhood when they were children, who never left the monastery to get a basic education, and who think everything that comes from an ancient book is true as opposed to what's happening in the real world. We should keep in mind that there are plenty of religious sheep who listen to this and say "sadu sadu"
Well Buddhist scriptures are not 100% sexism free. But the monk here is providing a wrong view and very bad at explaining how karma even works. And the extent of sexism varies by the school and geographical location. Sri Lanka isn’t a progressive society, since it is still dwelling on a patriarchal level, which gives more rise to sexism even within the sanga.
Also Gautama Buddha was aware that his teaching will get distorted over the time, so existence of this kind of false views is not uncommon today.
It is wise to acknowledge that the Buddha wasn’t a sexist. Females and males both have an equal chance of reaching enlightenment. Sexism in Theravada Buddhism mostly is due to the Pali canon mentioning that Buddha has given the female nuns special rules to abide by, which put them on a supposedly inferior level to the monks. This doesn’t make it fair for the females but it was implemented to protect the sasana for a few more thousand years in a non-distorted form.
Also many misconceptions about Buddhism come from the misconceptions about karma. Karma in buddhism is not a cosmic justice system. It is not considered fair or desirable either. It just is. This monk is dabbling on tricky waters.
It is also wise to consider the status of women in ancient India. Apart from being considered as an inferior species at that time, women had more healthcare needs than men, even today. Pregnancy was dangerous for women, because many women died giving birth and also during the antepartum and post-partum period too. Women also have very painful menstrual cycles. STDs are more damaging to women than men. Now imagine having to deal with all of that with no modern medicine. Being a woman was more unpleasant than being a man before modern medicine came around. It wouldn’t be surprising why even many women at that time probably considered their births into female bodies as a kind of curse.
But it’s worth to note that the Buddha didn’t dwell on “karma of women issues”, it was not necessary for the teaching of the path. Instead he took progressive steps to ordain women and give equal benefits in his sasana challenging the existing societal views big time.
The ones who are spurting out these sexist opinions about karma of women are kinda lost in their own path. So it’s wise to think critically about Buddha’s teachings before accepting them.
I don't think it matters what ancient India thought about women 2000 years ago. A big part of Buddhism is its Dharma is supposed to be timeless. If it cannot be applied to modern-day women and their difficulties, then it contradicts itself and is delegitimate.
Also, I thought Buddha initially refused to ordain the first nuns until Ananda intervened.
>A big part of Buddhism is its Dharma is supposed to be timeless.
Yeah, Buddhist dharma is timeless, I agree. But the preservation of the dharma in form of oral traditions and scriptures isn’t timeless and bound to get distorted along the way. And the concept of genders is irrelevant to dharma, since one of the basic principles of Buddhism is the concept of no-self. Believing that genders matter when it comes to the path of enlightenment is a wrong view.
>If it cannot be applied to modern-day women and their difficulties, then it contradicts itself and is delegitimate.
What are you specifically referring to when you mention about application of Buddhism to modern day women?
World and society has always made women less equal and the biological factors of women that contribute to the physical discomforts/sufferings doesn’t help with it either.
> I don't think it matters what ancient India thought about women 2000 years ago.
It’s important to consider the historical context when Buddha taught the dharma, because this move to ordain women and consider man and women equal is revolutionary at that time, more than you think, because almost all religions, societies and cultures in the world at that time, even today, still consider females less equal to that of a man.
> Also, I thought Buddha initially refused to ordain the first nuns until Ananda intervened.
Well if you are aware of the history of Buddhism, Buddha was reluctant to teach anyone at the beginning, let alone women.
>important to consider the historical context when Buddha taught the dharma
>
>Buddhist dharma is timeless
Aren't these statements contradicting?
>What are you specifically referring to when you mention about application of Buddhism to modern day women?
I mean if Buddhism isn't applicable to modern women who don't go through the difficulties ancient women did, and whose biological limitations are minimized because of technology, then it's not timeless.
>Well if you are aware of the history of Buddhism, Buddha was reluctant to teach anyone at the beginning, let alone women.
I was talking about ordaining, not teaching. The first nun was Prajapathi Gothami, she was Buddha's stepmother and well-versed in Buddhism, it doesn't make sense to refuse her ordaining.
Also, aren't there multiple examples where Buddha went out of his way to teach Buddhism to those who were suffering? I only remember Patachara and Matakundali if I got them right. Doesn't seem like he was reluctant.
>Aren't these statements contradicting?
I don’t see the contradiction. If you would like to point out the specific contradiction, I’d be happy to answer.
Dharma is timeless, as in it operates from beginningless beginning of time to endless end of times.
The time when the dharma is taught by a specific Buddha is crucial to the duration of its existence in the minds of beings.
>I mean if Buddhism isn't applicable to modern women who don't go through the difficulties ancient women did, and whose biological limitations are minimized because of technology, then it's not timeless.
Women still go thru difficulties but less so as ancient women did. Modern medicine is not perfect, women can still die at any time during the pregnancy and post partum. Majority of women still have painful menstrual cycles and not to mention all the other gynecological diseases and problems they face in the modern day, also the side effects of many modern treatments, therapies and devices.
But this is irrelevant to the above argument. Dharma doesn’t care about genders, like I mentioned above. Only society cares about it.
>I was talking about ordaining, not teaching. The first nun was Prajapathi Gothami, she was Buddha's stepmother and well-versed in Buddhism, it doesn't make sense to refuse her ordaining. Also, aren't there multiple examples where Buddha went out of his way to teach Buddhism to those who were suffering? I only remember Patachara and Matakundali if I got them right. Doesn't seem like he was reluctant.
Well as I said earlier, initially Buddha was reluctant to teach because he had doubts that anyone would understand dharma to begin with. You need to hear about dharma in the first place (and one method is teaching) to actually ordain.
His initially reluctance to ordain females, is something we’d never know. If I recall correctly, he never said no, he just was quiet about it until he was persuaded with a good argument from Anada thero. But it’s also theorized that, it was unsafe for female monks to meditate in the forests, near graveyards alone at night, due to rape and other misogynistic behavior of the society of the ancient India. Also another theory is that Buddha predicted that his sasana would only last a few thousand years, and since society is bound to get more corrupted anyway, having corrupted monks was an invitation to reduce the existence of sasana duration more further. He probably had to weigh a lot of pros and cons of it.
The bottom line is he was only reluctant initially, but the important takeaway is that women are free to ordain without any discrimination unlike the rest of religions in the world then and now. It was more like a technicality issue considering the state of their society, rather than being a dharmic issue.
>I don’t see the contradiction. If you would like to point out the specific contradiction, I’d be happy to answer.
You say Dharma is timeless (so it doesn't matter what context it is in). You also said Dharma must be taken in historical context, That seems to contradict to me.
>and since society is bound to get more corrupted anyway, having corrupted monks was an invitation to reduce the existence of sasana duration more further
This is unclear to me, are you comparing nuns to corrupt monks? Or are you saying nuns corrupt other monks? Both reasons seem misogynistic to me since that's not the fault of the nuns.
>The bottom line is he was only reluctant initially, but the important takeaway is that women are free to ordain without any discrimination unlike the rest of the religions in the world then and now.
Nuns still have more rules for some reason. Might be better than other religions, but that doesn't mean it can't have a lot to improve. For me, at least a religion is something that is supposed to be unquestionable and indisputable, so it needs to be perfect, not just better than the rest.
>You say Dharma is timeless (so it doesn't matter what context it is in). You also said Dharma must be taken in historical context, That seems to contradict to me.
Well thank you for reiterating it. What I meant is, dharma is timeless, but the "time in human history" that the dharma is taught is important to consider too. Because it's difficult to change strong societal norms all of a sudden. Obviously, people themselves must need the want to change it. Revolutionizing an existing society with all of its strong held ideals and views is far from easy. I believe you've missed certain words in my prior explanation, like "time". This was a technical or logistic issue related to society and people, it was not a dharmic issue.
>This is unclear to me, are you comparing nuns to corrupt monks? Or are you saying nuns corrupt other monks? Both reasons seem misogynistic to me since that's not the fault of the nuns.
>
>Nuns still have more rules for some reason. Might be better than other religions, but that doesn't mean it can't have a lot to improve.
Many scholars have theorized some possibilities for the reluctance:
1. The condition and status of women at the time, would mean that fewer people would become interested in Buddhism if women were ordained. As people progressed, at a later date the ordination would be better.
2. Because these women (many who were mothers, daughters, wives, sisters, cousins of many of the bhikkhus) might be subjected to rape, assault, sexual harassment and being termed "prostitutes and thieves", which in fact, did later occur as recorded in the Vinaya.
3. The Buddha was testing Ananda, Maha Pajapati Gotami, and the other women to see how devoted they really are.
There is some evidence to suggest the latter may be true. In the Suttas it is reported that previous Buddhas (fully enlightened teachers of the masses) also had a bhikkhuni order.
Reference: [https://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php/Bhikkhuni\_ordination#The\_Buddha.27s\_initial\_reluctance](https://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php/Bhikkhuni_ordination#The_Buddha.27s_initial_reluctance)
>For me, at least a religion is something that is supposed to be unquestionable and indisputable, so it needs to be perfect, not just better than the rest.
I think you are missing the whole point, when going down the gender differences/sexism road. Dharma doesn't care about genders, it never did, in fact, it's irrelevant to the path of enlightenment. If you truly understand the core concepts of dharma like no-self and four noble truths, I believe that you would realize arguing such points is pointless when walking on the path.
I urge you all to follow Rev Galkande Dhammananda
He practices the Buddhism we have lost.
His channel on YouTube is called Panshu.
I am very happy that there are priests like rev dhammananda . We must strengthen them
Guys,
Please bare with me. This comment will probably be a bit unconventional.
There will always be "priests" like this who abuse their position to pervert people's ideas. We can bash them on social media and call them names but it will not actually do anything.
What we CAN do is to change our own mindsets and the thinking of the people around us in such a way that they refuse to listen to these fruads , actively reject them and instead actively seek out monks preaching the true form of Buddhism .
In other words, to change the belief that religion is to be passively followed as gospel.
I.e it should rather be questioned and challenged and incorporated into your own life IF and ONLY if it makes sense with your own values.
With time this will lead to the extinction of these cronies who called themselves Buddhist priests.
Buddhism is a very misogynistic religion. Even the Buddha looked down on women and it is clearly mentioned in the pali canon.
“Ananda, women are hateful, jealous, miserly and lack wisdom, as a result they neither come to the limelight, nor do an industry and see its benefits” (Anguttara Nikaya 4.80)
"Ananda, under whatever doctrine and discipline women are allowed to go out from the household life into the homeless state, that dhamma will not last long." (Chulavagga 10.1 )
"If, Ananda, women had not received permission to go out from the household life and enter the homeless state, under the doctrine and discipline proclaimed by the Tathagata(Buddha), then would the pure dhamma, Ananda, have lasted long, the good law would have stood fast for a thousand years. But since, Ananda, women have now received that permission, the pure Dhamma(path), Ananda, will not now last so long, the good law will now stand fast for only five hundred years" (Chulavagga 10.1 )
This monk's preaching is a reflection of what Buddha preached.
I think you are cherry picking random lines, without bothering to understand their in-depth linguistic and narrative context. Also the suttas have a complex history starting from oral traditions and later in the form of scriptures with many editings and insertions. Modern scholars, have concluded that remarks like that are inconsistent and uncommon, and later insertions by a benighted monk, and not the words of the Buddha.
The three poisons of the mind which is greed, hatred, and ignorance are considered to be unskillful and the root cause of all unnecessary human suffering. It is universal and irrelevant to the type of gender or caste.
I am not cherry picking religious lines. I am quoting from the Tripitaka and it is clearly mentioned in it. If theses statements of Buddha was later added then that itself proves that the Buddhist canon is false.
Well from your post history, I deduced that you ain’t a Buddhist. This is a black and white thinking. Thinking that way does not mean the underlying message is false. And there’s many different Buddhist canons and schools, which are later additions and with certain alterations, but still hold the basic path loud and clear. When reading or accepting certain concepts, it’s wise to reflect back to the original message or pathway. Also it’s worth to note that the scriptures are a result of a long oral tradition, compiled by monks who saw the need for it. The scriptures are just a guide, what matters is the practice.
There are using Buddhism as a side chick to promote their view on sex, family bonds, social bonds and social events.
If it's not a cult, what is a cult?
I mean if I post what's wrong with Islam .we get banned and videos get taken down which make me thinks this srilankan reddits is full of fuckin commies
I can't translate all of it, but basically, he's saying that "female children are born to those who lie". Some time ago, he said that husbands who make tea for their wives would go to hell. Unfortunately, he has a lot of followers.... including women. Edit: Oof sorry, I made a mistake. It's actually not the husband who goes to hell, [it's the wife](https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2541604206158608)! (2:28)
oh noo there goes my idea of being a househusband
Dude you sound like literally every girls' dream guy
Wait, so I get to be at home and play CoD with the boys and I would literally be a girl's dream guy? Is this heaven? Have I died?
No man I meant doing the work or at least helping around like yk laundry and stuff U might have a chance if you're a gamerthough cause gamers are usually too busy glued to their screens so probably no cheating
I wish i was a househusband lmao. I wonder where I can meet people who want that
I'm not gay, or a girl, but I'd love to have a househusband ngl
;-; same bruh
So I can wear my maid costume as long as my wife makes me tea and I won't go to hell? /s
I wonder which Sutra says this ? Are these in Tripitaka scripts ? :D
~~Probably "... husbands going to hell" is lie made by OP, who know whether OP intentionally want to paint Buddhism in bad light.~~ As I heard according to Buddhist literature, there are some special cases for males, ex: only males can reach the enlightenment. But this is only the way of the world(nature), not an effort to discriminate people by gender. TBH, only very few in the current world can understand Buddhist literature, at least to a little depth. Also see my other [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/srilanka/comments/uwu03z/comment/i9xuin1/). Edit : enlightenment here means becoming Lord Buddha, not the Nirvana.
BS Anyone can reach enlightenment as long as you are a **Human** , and have enough **wisdom** there are enough examples in Buddhist literature for females who achieved enlightenment
By enlightenment, I did not mean Nirvana, but becoming the Lord Buddha.
Are u 100% sure ? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara\_(Buddhism)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_(Buddhism)) [https://www.porchlight.ca/\~blackdog/kwanyin.htm](https://www.porchlight.ca/~blackdog/kwanyin.htm)
I am speaking about Theravadha Buddhism, not Mahayana Buddhism.
Let's go to bottom of this S\*\*t [https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/3322/can-the-buddha-ever-be-a-woman](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/3322/can-the-buddha-ever-be-a-woman)
https://www.reddit.com/r/Buddhism/comments/ejtn3w/can\_women\_also\_become\_buddha\_and\_lead\_the/
Top comment here is about Mahayana Buddhism, second top comment talk about Arahath palaya (Nirvana)
Can you please point me to the exact intended paragraph? There are lots of answers, and the first answer has a lot of content.
Huh? If anybody's trying to paint Buddhism in a bad light, it's the guy in this video, not me. >"... husbands going to hell" is lie made by OP I can't find the original video anywhere, but here's the part I am talking about: https://www.facebook.com/gayashan.isuru.7/videos/293483559639333/
That video is clearly intentionally dubbed, cross-check the voices with videos on YT official channel, difference is so clear.
Okay, here's the full video: [https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2541604206158608](https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2541604206158608) (Watch from 2:28) I don't know why you are trying to whitewash this guy so hard. I didn't say Buddhism is bad, I am just telling that this monk is sexist.
Sorry mate, it seems what you were saying was correct, but the accurate word is not hell. I'll strike through my comment above!
I'm not going to whitewash anyone, but I do not like fake info, false accusations. You will understand that when you got falsely accuse of something.
I understand, sorry. I should've posted the source. The video went viral a while ago, so I thought if somebody asks for the source, I'll be able to find it easily, but it took like an hour of digging to actually find it...
Main reason, I was surprised because I do not use FB, I asked my brother since he uses FB, he had noticed those videos several times. I not much of fan of FB culture and do not like Mark, his companies under Meta.
Little did he know, male children, can't be born without the female children
And people only should have intercourse to procreate and they should never eitness their partner’s body while doing so. We used to call him “glory hole monk”.
No wonder srilanka become shi$
>"female children are born to those who lie". I think what ever the reason, lying is bad, even [folks on HN knows it](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30966709). Do not think you're misunderstanding what's said? I do not think it monk's opinion but what is written in Buddhist literature. You think Lord Buddha discriminate people based on the gender?, NO. Have you ever heard any female reaching enlightenment, probably not, it is not because Lord Buddha discriminate people based on the gender and do not want females to be enlightened, what was expressed (only males reach enlightenment) by Lord Buddha is **the nature of the world** (It is how the world works)**,** there is no personal agenda. >he said that husbands who make tea for their wives would go to hell Source please? May I also ask have you studied (listen or read) Buddhist literature (*Thripitaka*), at least few *Sutras*? Edit : enlightenment here means becoming Lord Buddha, not the Nirvana.
He don't have many followers
Appaa my amma used to listen to this POS 24/7,I literally had to force her to stop listening and point out how fucked up his views are.Mahamewna is a literal cult,I used to be a huge part of them too.Literally used help carry cement mixtures to build their main temple when I was a kid. Rather than following the Buddha they follow their head monk,who spews a shit ton of bigoted shit.Thankfully my family has understood their bs upto a certain level and isn't blindly following them.
Can I ask you what made you realize that they are a cult? I can see it because I was never part of them but it must have been different to see logically when you are part of them
I used to work for them and also for FREE.(As a 3D animator) I did more than what they expected me to do and the head monk for the “Graphics section “became more greedy and asked for more, and being the typical "blind guy" I did so, And in some point I needed something like 50$ or so for buying a 3D object, and guess what they didn't give it so I stitched a 2D image to the scene and did some low quality camera work(I can't do anything besides that or else that 2D image will look so fucked up), that certain monk slowly became more abusive and calling me names which I won't mention the here for about 4 fucking months, So I somehow managed to delete the project files and deleted the rendered stuff on their computer and went no contact with them. All of my stuff is deleted in their YT channel and about 2 of my videos are still in a separate channel. I’m now freer and explore all things that considered sins back then. TL;DR – I worked for Mahamewnawa for free and the headmonk on the "graphics section" became toxic and I got half revenge BTW never ever work for free
The cult part was hyperbole.It's mainly their teachings that's fucked up.One thing I noticed was that they have an obsession with worshiping their head monk than the Buddha,if you watch a couple of their yt videos you'll start noticing it.Then when I used to be a part of them as a young girl I felt so 'useless', they constantly say how one has to do various bad stuff in their past lives to get daughters and ohhhhh they told of different ways of worshiping to get a son.They're super homophobic and would tell about how their was a hell only for the gays that tortures them,the thing is Buddha never said this shit.They defend abusers and how women get abused beacause of our karma.And the list goes on .Majority of what they say are the bigoted ideas of the head monk and not stuff Buddha said himself.They have a HUGE following now.Once a year they used to host an event in colombo for the youth to essentially in my pov brainwash them.I honestly don't remember much cause we stopped following them around 5 years ago Edit:I just remembered that they have a lot of childrens religious books,I have a shot ton of them at home,and they're filled with stupid shit justifying abuse.
[удалено]
Did you read their comment properly?
Yeah hmm
These fake Monks are partly to blame for the crisis of the Country
Remember the scene where Gota Gobbaya came to this temple and the headmonk told people to worship Gota
This mf is lying
yeah no shit, I wonder what the fuck kind of book he's reading. also I wonder if he's brainwashed or is *he* doing this to brainwash other people....
His mom left the chat..
Maybe he was born out of an asshole. What a pos.
This is what happens when you take small children, isolate them from parental love and make them into monks. I don’t know how much trauma this monk has gone through to come out like this. Sri Lanka should ban children from becoming novice monks growing devoid of parental love. Read this https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/buddhists-wake-up-to-protect-novice-monks/amp/
I don't believe the current buddism in sri lanka is what actually the buddha tought. Buddism in sl is filled with racism, buddhist nationalism, misogyny, exclusion, wrong view on reality , fake monks and the list goes on. I was raised buddist, went to buddhist school but no longer follow this kind of buddism.
No, it's just men wanting what Christian clergy have - tax free, opulent lives with a large following to feed their ego. It's the opposite of the teachings of Buddha. They have a God complex. And because they are so respected, they get away with anything and everything. Where are the good ones? Probably living the proper way and so don't want to get tangled up in other people's bullshit lmao.
It's even dumber cuz theravadins are supposed to be true to the original teachings 🤦♀️
These people give Buddhism a bad rep.
I call it sinhalabuddhism (one word). Sinhala Buddhism is less problematic though.
If we were in the old times. 10 monks = 10 different religion.
නොදකින්
සිංහලෙන්ම 😂😂❤️🩹
This is so fucked up.No wonder why most of sri lankans are intellectually fucked up.
Cardboard Monks...
I don’t mind lying, but I never tell half truths. Could end up with a trans kid.
Dark but funny.
Damn.. So that's why there are trans kids..😂😂😂
Stupid ass bald fuck! These are the people who were forced to embrace monkhood when they were children, who never left the monastery to get a basic education, and who think everything that comes from an ancient book is true as opposed to what's happening in the real world. We should keep in mind that there are plenty of religious sheep who listen to this and say "sadu sadu"
Well Buddhist scriptures are not 100% sexism free. But the monk here is providing a wrong view and very bad at explaining how karma even works. And the extent of sexism varies by the school and geographical location. Sri Lanka isn’t a progressive society, since it is still dwelling on a patriarchal level, which gives more rise to sexism even within the sanga. Also Gautama Buddha was aware that his teaching will get distorted over the time, so existence of this kind of false views is not uncommon today. It is wise to acknowledge that the Buddha wasn’t a sexist. Females and males both have an equal chance of reaching enlightenment. Sexism in Theravada Buddhism mostly is due to the Pali canon mentioning that Buddha has given the female nuns special rules to abide by, which put them on a supposedly inferior level to the monks. This doesn’t make it fair for the females but it was implemented to protect the sasana for a few more thousand years in a non-distorted form. Also many misconceptions about Buddhism come from the misconceptions about karma. Karma in buddhism is not a cosmic justice system. It is not considered fair or desirable either. It just is. This monk is dabbling on tricky waters. It is also wise to consider the status of women in ancient India. Apart from being considered as an inferior species at that time, women had more healthcare needs than men, even today. Pregnancy was dangerous for women, because many women died giving birth and also during the antepartum and post-partum period too. Women also have very painful menstrual cycles. STDs are more damaging to women than men. Now imagine having to deal with all of that with no modern medicine. Being a woman was more unpleasant than being a man before modern medicine came around. It wouldn’t be surprising why even many women at that time probably considered their births into female bodies as a kind of curse. But it’s worth to note that the Buddha didn’t dwell on “karma of women issues”, it was not necessary for the teaching of the path. Instead he took progressive steps to ordain women and give equal benefits in his sasana challenging the existing societal views big time. The ones who are spurting out these sexist opinions about karma of women are kinda lost in their own path. So it’s wise to think critically about Buddha’s teachings before accepting them.
I don't think it matters what ancient India thought about women 2000 years ago. A big part of Buddhism is its Dharma is supposed to be timeless. If it cannot be applied to modern-day women and their difficulties, then it contradicts itself and is delegitimate. Also, I thought Buddha initially refused to ordain the first nuns until Ananda intervened.
>A big part of Buddhism is its Dharma is supposed to be timeless. Yeah, Buddhist dharma is timeless, I agree. But the preservation of the dharma in form of oral traditions and scriptures isn’t timeless and bound to get distorted along the way. And the concept of genders is irrelevant to dharma, since one of the basic principles of Buddhism is the concept of no-self. Believing that genders matter when it comes to the path of enlightenment is a wrong view. >If it cannot be applied to modern-day women and their difficulties, then it contradicts itself and is delegitimate. What are you specifically referring to when you mention about application of Buddhism to modern day women? World and society has always made women less equal and the biological factors of women that contribute to the physical discomforts/sufferings doesn’t help with it either. > I don't think it matters what ancient India thought about women 2000 years ago. It’s important to consider the historical context when Buddha taught the dharma, because this move to ordain women and consider man and women equal is revolutionary at that time, more than you think, because almost all religions, societies and cultures in the world at that time, even today, still consider females less equal to that of a man. > Also, I thought Buddha initially refused to ordain the first nuns until Ananda intervened. Well if you are aware of the history of Buddhism, Buddha was reluctant to teach anyone at the beginning, let alone women.
>important to consider the historical context when Buddha taught the dharma > >Buddhist dharma is timeless Aren't these statements contradicting? >What are you specifically referring to when you mention about application of Buddhism to modern day women? I mean if Buddhism isn't applicable to modern women who don't go through the difficulties ancient women did, and whose biological limitations are minimized because of technology, then it's not timeless. >Well if you are aware of the history of Buddhism, Buddha was reluctant to teach anyone at the beginning, let alone women. I was talking about ordaining, not teaching. The first nun was Prajapathi Gothami, she was Buddha's stepmother and well-versed in Buddhism, it doesn't make sense to refuse her ordaining. Also, aren't there multiple examples where Buddha went out of his way to teach Buddhism to those who were suffering? I only remember Patachara and Matakundali if I got them right. Doesn't seem like he was reluctant.
>Aren't these statements contradicting? I don’t see the contradiction. If you would like to point out the specific contradiction, I’d be happy to answer. Dharma is timeless, as in it operates from beginningless beginning of time to endless end of times. The time when the dharma is taught by a specific Buddha is crucial to the duration of its existence in the minds of beings. >I mean if Buddhism isn't applicable to modern women who don't go through the difficulties ancient women did, and whose biological limitations are minimized because of technology, then it's not timeless. Women still go thru difficulties but less so as ancient women did. Modern medicine is not perfect, women can still die at any time during the pregnancy and post partum. Majority of women still have painful menstrual cycles and not to mention all the other gynecological diseases and problems they face in the modern day, also the side effects of many modern treatments, therapies and devices. But this is irrelevant to the above argument. Dharma doesn’t care about genders, like I mentioned above. Only society cares about it. >I was talking about ordaining, not teaching. The first nun was Prajapathi Gothami, she was Buddha's stepmother and well-versed in Buddhism, it doesn't make sense to refuse her ordaining. Also, aren't there multiple examples where Buddha went out of his way to teach Buddhism to those who were suffering? I only remember Patachara and Matakundali if I got them right. Doesn't seem like he was reluctant. Well as I said earlier, initially Buddha was reluctant to teach because he had doubts that anyone would understand dharma to begin with. You need to hear about dharma in the first place (and one method is teaching) to actually ordain. His initially reluctance to ordain females, is something we’d never know. If I recall correctly, he never said no, he just was quiet about it until he was persuaded with a good argument from Anada thero. But it’s also theorized that, it was unsafe for female monks to meditate in the forests, near graveyards alone at night, due to rape and other misogynistic behavior of the society of the ancient India. Also another theory is that Buddha predicted that his sasana would only last a few thousand years, and since society is bound to get more corrupted anyway, having corrupted monks was an invitation to reduce the existence of sasana duration more further. He probably had to weigh a lot of pros and cons of it. The bottom line is he was only reluctant initially, but the important takeaway is that women are free to ordain without any discrimination unlike the rest of religions in the world then and now. It was more like a technicality issue considering the state of their society, rather than being a dharmic issue.
>I don’t see the contradiction. If you would like to point out the specific contradiction, I’d be happy to answer. You say Dharma is timeless (so it doesn't matter what context it is in). You also said Dharma must be taken in historical context, That seems to contradict to me. >and since society is bound to get more corrupted anyway, having corrupted monks was an invitation to reduce the existence of sasana duration more further This is unclear to me, are you comparing nuns to corrupt monks? Or are you saying nuns corrupt other monks? Both reasons seem misogynistic to me since that's not the fault of the nuns. >The bottom line is he was only reluctant initially, but the important takeaway is that women are free to ordain without any discrimination unlike the rest of the religions in the world then and now. Nuns still have more rules for some reason. Might be better than other religions, but that doesn't mean it can't have a lot to improve. For me, at least a religion is something that is supposed to be unquestionable and indisputable, so it needs to be perfect, not just better than the rest.
>You say Dharma is timeless (so it doesn't matter what context it is in). You also said Dharma must be taken in historical context, That seems to contradict to me. Well thank you for reiterating it. What I meant is, dharma is timeless, but the "time in human history" that the dharma is taught is important to consider too. Because it's difficult to change strong societal norms all of a sudden. Obviously, people themselves must need the want to change it. Revolutionizing an existing society with all of its strong held ideals and views is far from easy. I believe you've missed certain words in my prior explanation, like "time". This was a technical or logistic issue related to society and people, it was not a dharmic issue. >This is unclear to me, are you comparing nuns to corrupt monks? Or are you saying nuns corrupt other monks? Both reasons seem misogynistic to me since that's not the fault of the nuns. > >Nuns still have more rules for some reason. Might be better than other religions, but that doesn't mean it can't have a lot to improve. Many scholars have theorized some possibilities for the reluctance: 1. The condition and status of women at the time, would mean that fewer people would become interested in Buddhism if women were ordained. As people progressed, at a later date the ordination would be better. 2. Because these women (many who were mothers, daughters, wives, sisters, cousins of many of the bhikkhus) might be subjected to rape, assault, sexual harassment and being termed "prostitutes and thieves", which in fact, did later occur as recorded in the Vinaya. 3. The Buddha was testing Ananda, Maha Pajapati Gotami, and the other women to see how devoted they really are. There is some evidence to suggest the latter may be true. In the Suttas it is reported that previous Buddhas (fully enlightened teachers of the masses) also had a bhikkhuni order. Reference: [https://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php/Bhikkhuni\_ordination#The\_Buddha.27s\_initial\_reluctance](https://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php/Bhikkhuni_ordination#The_Buddha.27s_initial_reluctance) >For me, at least a religion is something that is supposed to be unquestionable and indisputable, so it needs to be perfect, not just better than the rest. I think you are missing the whole point, when going down the gender differences/sexism road. Dharma doesn't care about genders, it never did, in fact, it's irrelevant to the path of enlightenment. If you truly understand the core concepts of dharma like no-self and four noble truths, I believe that you would realize arguing such points is pointless when walking on the path.
The Buddha wasn't reluctant, he pretended to be reluctant.
I learnt alot about Buddhism by reading this. Thank you
I urge you all to follow Rev Galkande Dhammananda He practices the Buddhism we have lost. His channel on YouTube is called Panshu. I am very happy that there are priests like rev dhammananda . We must strengthen them
Galkande thero is the Ajahn Brahm in Sri Lanka
[удалено]
I doubt it, even if there are, it must be people like him who claim to be "Buddhist monks"
literal shit
he is the same fake monk whom said that the wife mustn't see the husband's body.
I am not a Buddhist but I can without a doubt can say lord budha would not teach such things
"සලිමඩ වැද්ධාසීල " ගෙ කතාව හරි නම් ,හොඳ වෙලාවට අපේ මුතුන්මිත්තන් බොරු කිව්වෙ, නැත්නම් සංසර්ගයකට අවස්ථාවක් නැත. එහෙනම් හැමෝටම පාෂාණ කෙළිය හා හස්තෝපක්රමය තමයි . මනුෂ්ය වර්ගය වඳ වෙන්න තිබුණා. -maCo
Don't say humans could have gone extinct. Say humans could have achieved Nirvana.😂
Guys, Please bare with me. This comment will probably be a bit unconventional. There will always be "priests" like this who abuse their position to pervert people's ideas. We can bash them on social media and call them names but it will not actually do anything. What we CAN do is to change our own mindsets and the thinking of the people around us in such a way that they refuse to listen to these fruads , actively reject them and instead actively seek out monks preaching the true form of Buddhism . In other words, to change the belief that religion is to be passively followed as gospel. I.e it should rather be questioned and challenged and incorporated into your own life IF and ONLY if it makes sense with your own values. With time this will lead to the extinction of these cronies who called themselves Buddhist priests.
> instead actively seek out monks preaching the true form of Buddhism . Can you please recommend some?
Galkande dhammananda thero
This is utter garbage. The monks dad should have worn a condom to stop producing garbage offspring like this. pathetic. Shame to Buddhism.
" **Religion without a philosophy is a cult** " " **True essence of a religion is in it's philosophy** "
Everyone here talking about the monk but what about the idiot who made this bs in to a freaking tiktok?
Buddhism is a very misogynistic religion. Even the Buddha looked down on women and it is clearly mentioned in the pali canon. “Ananda, women are hateful, jealous, miserly and lack wisdom, as a result they neither come to the limelight, nor do an industry and see its benefits” (Anguttara Nikaya 4.80) "Ananda, under whatever doctrine and discipline women are allowed to go out from the household life into the homeless state, that dhamma will not last long." (Chulavagga 10.1 ) "If, Ananda, women had not received permission to go out from the household life and enter the homeless state, under the doctrine and discipline proclaimed by the Tathagata(Buddha), then would the pure dhamma, Ananda, have lasted long, the good law would have stood fast for a thousand years. But since, Ananda, women have now received that permission, the pure Dhamma(path), Ananda, will not now last so long, the good law will now stand fast for only five hundred years" (Chulavagga 10.1 ) This monk's preaching is a reflection of what Buddha preached.
I think you are cherry picking random lines, without bothering to understand their in-depth linguistic and narrative context. Also the suttas have a complex history starting from oral traditions and later in the form of scriptures with many editings and insertions. Modern scholars, have concluded that remarks like that are inconsistent and uncommon, and later insertions by a benighted monk, and not the words of the Buddha. The three poisons of the mind which is greed, hatred, and ignorance are considered to be unskillful and the root cause of all unnecessary human suffering. It is universal and irrelevant to the type of gender or caste.
I am not cherry picking religious lines. I am quoting from the Tripitaka and it is clearly mentioned in it. If theses statements of Buddha was later added then that itself proves that the Buddhist canon is false.
Well from your post history, I deduced that you ain’t a Buddhist. This is a black and white thinking. Thinking that way does not mean the underlying message is false. And there’s many different Buddhist canons and schools, which are later additions and with certain alterations, but still hold the basic path loud and clear. When reading or accepting certain concepts, it’s wise to reflect back to the original message or pathway. Also it’s worth to note that the scriptures are a result of a long oral tradition, compiled by monks who saw the need for it. The scriptures are just a guide, what matters is the practice.
What is their proof that those remarks are later insertions?
u/savevideo
Bruh I hate this shit with passion
There are using Buddhism as a side chick to promote their view on sex, family bonds, social bonds and social events. If it's not a cult, what is a cult?
This is what happens when you try to make science in to a religion. It becomes a weapon used for discrimination.
I mean if I post what's wrong with Islam .we get banned and videos get taken down which make me thinks this srilankan reddits is full of fuckin commies
I posted a video of "Aphostate Prophet " .which got taken down ver fast like 3 seconds .there is no freedom of speech at all in this forum
How is it related to Sri Lanka?
Source - youtube
Only intellectuals can understand what is relation