Warning to Porsche-driving Nun

[Tenzin Malgyur]

In my opinion, it is most fine for a nun to drive a Porsche or any other car that was sincerely offered to the monastery by devotees. Since we are not in the full knowledge of the situation when these pictures were captured, it is best not to judge.
I agree with the opinion of Midakpa that states that people might have a confused idea on how they expect people like Mae Chees should behave. It is so pitiful that the religious people are the targets of meddling parties who are always on the watch to catch some malicious gossips to share in their Facebook.

[Kim Hyun Jae]

Monk or nun can be offered expensive gifts by their devoted students. Expensive gifts like house, land, car, extravagant hotels etc. are offered to monk or nun due to devotion of their students.

What is wrong with that? It is the people who perceive these gifts as inappropriate to a sangha member and may mislead to wrong perception towards them. The warning by the government was to exert control over the "public behavior" of the sangha member and avoiding wrong view of them.

[lotus1]

We should never judge what others offer to the sangha. As long as the motivation from the lay person is good, it's good enough to generate the merits. Sangha is a merit field for lay people like us to generate merits. Sangha should accept the offering because of this.

On the side of the nun, if her motivation is good, she generate merits as well. Whatever it is, they will be answerable to their own karmas. So please do not judge.

Very well said Klien. Motivation is the most important thing when we do offerings. We are not the person who makes the offerings. So, it is not to us to judge him / her. Although for some tradition of Buddhism, Sangha is not supposed to own any worldly possession especially luxuries. However, there are text according the 50 verses of Guru devotion, a disciple should make material offering from the cheapest to the most expensive to the Guru. This is to train us on generosity as well as to give us a chance to generate a lot of merits.

[Rihanna]

There are always two sides to a coin. In Buddhist teachings, we learn that for as long as the motivation of the offering is pure, then the act is good. In this case, the sponsor may want the nun to have a strong reliable vehicle so that she can move around faster and more comfortably to do her dharma work. From the part of the nun, she accepted the offering so that her sponsor can collect merits and also not to offend the sponsor and not out of desire or attachment.

Another example is most Tibetan monks are non vegetarian. But on the other hand, we are also taught not to kill. However, due to the landscape of where most monasteries are located , it is not possible for vegetables to grow hence eating meat for sustenance is the only option. It is not out of attachment or desire from the part of the monk. But if this is taken out of context, and someone takes a photo of a monk eating Yak meat, for example, then it would be seen as a wrong act by the monk.

Having said that, as it is the mass perception that Buddhism teaches simplicity and non-attachment to worldly things, I think from the part of the giver and receiver they should be more sensitive so as not to disturb the minds of the people around them.

[Dondrup Shugden]

The answer as to whether a monastic member should be driving a Porsche has many views and different answers but I like this one from cookie best.

"In Samsara, a situation as such would be scorned at. Everyone has the "expectation" that a monk or nun or anyone who is holding spiritual vows must only live humbly or in this case "adhere to sufficiency way of life". Many will hold on to the view that it is inappropriate for them to have the finer things of life because religion speaks of non-attachment, renunciation, letting go etc, as the way of life. But for those who have no vows and has the means, it is rightful to enjoy the finer things of life ! How ironic is that !
There is this story of 2 men and 2 pieces of fruit. One man picks the ripe fruit and left the unripened one to the other. Hence the other man got angry. This anger comes from the thought that he has been treated unfairly; also that he wanted the ripe fruit too and did not get it. If his thought was more pure, that a fruit is a fruit and as long as he does not grasp at the thought of that "HE" is more important , then the anger would not arise. This grasping of "I"(must always have the "best") is the cause of the anger.
So ..... if we don't hold to the fact that only certain people are "entitled" to drive a Porche, then such controversies will not arise. If we look at the Porche as just another car, it was gifted to the Nun with good intentions, the Nun did not obtain it  is using it with pure motives, then she is pretty much entitled to drive it too !
The general rule is that offerings must be given or received without DECEIT. Deceit with respect to the object being offered, and deceitful motives. Deceit with respect the the object being offered means that some faulty actions was committed whilst one obtained the things to be offered. Deceitful motives are wrong intentions ."

Personally as a laity I would give the best I can to my teacher may my teacher be a monk or nun.  And out of kindness, our teacher will accept what we offered and not be offended may the offering be a Porsche or a small cheap car.

It is our sincere devotion that we offer what we can.

Therefore is not whether a nun should drive a Porsche but rather the giver should have given something more appropriate.  Then is this not another judgement of our dualistic mind.