Whats the point of lay practice?

[ChangYuan]

So, I was in chat with Caz, and we were talking about emptiness, dependent origination and other light topics. When suddenly it came to me.

What truly is the point of Buddhism for the lay practitioner?

We are not likely to achieve enlightenment, for we have many other duties and such that we take care of so we cannot practice as would seem to be required.  This isn't christianity where we just have faith and some hope that we are doing the right thing to achieve a reward after death.  So then what exactly are we practicing for? To get a step further on our evolution to where maybe in the next life or 2 or 3 we might reach nibbana?  To make this life a bit more palatable as we suffer along?  *head explodes*

[Gesar]

Yeah, I dunno, guess we might as well give up, close all these forums, and go home. 

Except you never know; enlightenment can be just around the corner, they say. The Buddha had householder followers who reached enlightenment. Maybe your life is too hectic or something; maybe you need to examine your priorities.

[Caz]

Suffering only increases if we dont practise. This life isnt the end we can be blown about on the winds of our karma to unfortunate rebirths which can last for a very long time, So for this reason even for the layman it is wise to practise morality and meditative insight to decrease delusions. By becoming familiar with our subjects they will eventually arise naturally in our mind so yes Nivarna is very possible in one lifetime. Even if we dont achieve it in this lifetime by practising we create the causes to be reborn in higher realms, More specifically Dharma realms such as Tushita or Sukhavati where we can fully accomplish the paths and grounds.

What is the point of practise for the layman ? To cultivate virtue and decrease delusions. Even for the ordained this is the basis of their practise. This life or in the future we create the causes for Full enlightenment, Samsaric suffering has lasted since beginingless time and yet enlightenment can be accomplished within a few lives or even this life is we create the causes and the results will be splendid indeed. 

[Gesar]

We already have a thread on a very similar topic, here in Dharma Express: "Can lay Buddhists really make progress on the path?"  This new one seems like unnecessary duplication, IMHO.

[Wonky Badger]

We already have a thread on a very similar topic, here in Dharma Express: "Can lay Buddhists really make progress on the path?"  This new one seems like unnecessary duplication, IMHO.

Same ...but different. 

Addressing the OP, I've actually started to feel like I use laity as an excuse to make bad decisions. I clearly see Mara trying to deceive and seduce me, I know what's going on, and then I think "Well, hey, I'm just a layman" and I let it happen. I bet a lot of us have had the realizations needed to make swift progress on the path, to make the right decisions and know what is skillful and what is not but still the notion of being laypeople keeps us back.

I think the error I have made is to think that laypeople don't have to practice wholehearted; that half-assed is good enough. I think that I have to change that view.

[javajoba]

I'm not to sure one is better than another (monk or lay).  As a monk you do get to put more attention on studies and as a lay person you get to practice more looking in the mirror and actually putting your-our practice to use in the real world, everyday bumping up against samsara.  However I think monks have different problems wearing robes that they must over come.

There has been several books written about lay practitioners becoming enlightened in some very unexpected vocations, like prostitutes, pimps, or arrow makers. If you saw Marpa eating leftover fish guts at the docks would you think he was enlightened? I don't think I would. I've just been reminded that we all live in the realm  of suffering.  It's what we do today that determines out next bardo. 

[Monkey Mind]

The expected role and outcome of lay life is somewhat different in the different traditions, but it seems like across the board modern Buddhists have more options available as lay practitioners.

For several hundred years, the primary role of the lay person was to support the monastics through either donations of food, clothes, money, or through volunteerism. Such a lifestyle would result in a favorable rebirth. However, this is directly related to literacy rates; often monastics learn to read and the local villagers remain illiterate. If one reads the sutras, it is easy to see that: 1) in the early days of Buddhism, lay people were capable of achieving nirvana/ Bhoddhisatva, or sotapana (i.e. whatever your practice holds as the desired endpoint); 2) there were lay people who were highly motivated in an advanced practice.

Some links...
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel294.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/khantipalo/wheel206.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.026.than.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bogoda/wheel397.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html


http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/07/07/lay-buddhist-practice-1/
http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/07/14/the-art-of-lay-life-2/
http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/07/22/the-art-of-lay-life-3-selecting-elements/
http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/the-art-of-lay-life-4-selecting-elements-cont/
http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/08/06/the-art-of-lay-life-4-rejecting-elements/
http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/08/13/the-art-of-lay-life-6-rejecting-elements-cont/
http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/08/22/the-art-of-lay-life-7-balancing-elements/
http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/the-art-of-lay-life-8-balancing-elements-cont/
http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/09/05/the-art-of-lay-life-9-simplifying/
http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/09/12/the-art-of-lay-life-10-lay-and-monastic/
http://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/2011/09/19/the-art-of-lay-life-11-lay-and-monastic-cont/

[incognito]

This isn't christianity where we just have faith and some hope that we are doing the right thing to achieve a reward after death.  So then what exactly are we practicing for? To get a step further on our evolution to where maybe in the next life or 2 or 3 we might reach nibbana?  To make this life a bit more palatable as we suffer along?  *head explodes*

No, it isn't Chritianity, but there's a verse from the Rule of St. Benedict that might help in regard to your question(s):

"Something for the strong to strive after and nothing to dishearten the weak."

So what's the point of lay practice? All of the above stated reasons, just as it should be.... to get a step further in evolution to where maybe in the next life or 2 or 3 one might reach nibbana, should this be their understanding of practice, and  to make this life a bit more palatable through the cessation of suffering to what ever degree possible.

[Blue Garuda]

I know a few monastics.  From what they tell me of monastery life, time available for practice (meditation, pujas etc.) is quite limited.   Sometimes, one told me, they were so busy they could not do their daily practice during the day and had to try to do it late into the night and early morning.

In terms of Tantric commitments, lay people are expected to perform as much as monastics. For example, I have a commitment to six puja practice sessions daily, plus a minimum number of mantras and offerings. There are also much longer pujas twice a month and other montly practices to complete.

For someone at work it would mean simply doing as Islamic workers do each day. However,  I suspect it would entail quite a battle with some employers. 

I see no distinction in the 'point' of the practice, but of course we must be mindful of the obstacles faced by lay people in countries where there is poverty, persecution etc.  Actually, those things would also affect the monastics, but maybe not as much.

[ChangYuan]

Nice to see that this got some thoughts running for people.

My thought that had me post this in the first place was this: perhaps its great that nowadays laypersons are much more knowledgeable, and study as much as monks on top of our other responsibilities. But on top of that, with all the information available because of the internet and such, do we complicate our practice too much?

[lowonthetotem]

If we consider the Buddhist community as a whole, meaning not just we Buddhists here in the western hemisphere, there are still a great many Buddhist lay people who are not studying or practicing in a way similar to monastics. Although there have been attempts to bring Buddhism out of the monastery, TNH's "Engaged Buddhism" is the one I am most familiar with, I am not sure these have been terribly successful in Asia. I think westerners are rather fortunate in this regard. One of the primary "points" of practice for lay Buddhists is to support the monastic community.

In general, though, I think that lay practicioners and monastics share the same goals. Although enlightenment is unlikely (as much for monastics as lay people I would argue), it is still the goal or point of practice. Along the way both lay people and monastics hope to alleviate the suffering, their own and others'. I think this can be easily lost when we become too preoccupied with philosophy and other academic concerns.

[ChangYuan]

If we consider the Buddhist community as a whole, meaning not just we Buddhists here in the western hemisphere, there are still a great many Buddhist lay people who are not studying or practicing in a way similar to monastics. Although there have been attempts to bring Buddhism out of the monastery, TNH's "Engaged Buddhism" is the one I am most familiar with, I am not sure these have been terribly successful in Asia. I think westerners are rather fortunate in this regard. One of the primary "points" of practice for lay Buddhists is to support the monastic community.

In general, though, I think that lay practicioners and monastics share the same goals. Although enlightenment is unlikely (as much for monastics as lay people I would argue), it is still the goal or point of practice. Along the way both lay people and monastics hope to alleviate the suffering, their own and others'. I think this can be easily lost when we become too preoccupied with philosophy and other academic concerns.

Very true. I guess I should have said western laypersons.

[Spiny le Norman]

Although there have been attempts to bring Buddhism out of the monastery, TNH's "Engaged Buddhism" is the one I am most familiar with, I am not sure these have been terribly successful in Asia. I think westerners are rather fortunate in this regard.

Yes, we are fortunate in not being defined by Asian cultural traditions.

Spiny

[Blue Garuda]

It is perhaps an irony that just as we see Weterners seeking to draw from the best that Asian cultures have to offer in terms of  spirituality,  the kids in India (and maybe China?) are ditching much of it in favour of  fashion, fags, fast food and ferkin  (I speak of course of beer).   Lay practice for them has taken on an altogether different meaning.

Of course we can and should develop Buddhism to be meaningful in our own cultural contexts, but it would be nice if Buddha was remembered within his context, unlike portrayals of a white Jesus with a Bronx accent.  (I still wonder how the Tea Party would have coped with a black Jesus.)

I wonder if lay persons, compared with monastics,  have a greater or lesser attraction to the superficial aspects of rituals rather than their deeper purpose.   have we a shorter span of attention and more of a need to be entertained?

Practice makes perfect...........................but some practices are better than others. ;)

[Gesar]

It is perhaps an irony that just as we see Weterners seeking to draw from the best that Asian cultures have to offer in terms of  spirituality,  the kids in India (and maybe China?) are ditching much of it in favour of  fashion, fags, fast food and ferkin  (I speak of course of beer).   Lay practice for them has taken on an altogether different meaning.

Of course we can and should develop Buddhism to be meaningful in our own cultural contexts, but it would be nice if Buddha was remembered within his context, unlike portrayals of a white Jesus with a Bronx accent.  (I still wonder how the Tea Party would have coped with a black Jesus.)

I wonder if lay persons, compared with monastics,  have a greater or lesser attraction to the superficial aspects of rituals rather than their deeper purpose.   have we a shorter span of attention and more of a need to be entertained?

Just because people are born into a Buddhist culture doesn't make them Buddhists. Think about all the people who say they're Christian, but never open a Bible or go to church. They're only "cultural Christians". I've discussed this with lamas, and they agree that many Asian Buddhists only say they're Buddhists because their cultural environment is Buddhist. In fact, the abbott at Hemis Monastery in Ladakh came out and said that young Tibetans are no longer interested in Buddhism, they're interested in materialism and Western things, or Bollywood culture, while Western Buddhists are some of the most devoted Buddhists he's ever seen. (In Andrew Harvey's "A Journey In Ladakh")

RE: how Westerners relate to ritual vs. Easterners---um...didn't the Buddha say not to cling to ritual? The Westerners are probably closer to the Buddha's example.