top | item 25715094

St. Benedict’s Rule for Monasteries (516)

255 points| simonebrunozzi | 5 years ago |gutenberg.org

152 comments

order
[+] hawktheslayer|5 years ago|reply
Interesting to see this on the front page! I spent a year in a monetary mostly cloistered. While I'm glad now for the life I ultimately chose of having a family, I often draw from the experience, especially the discernment process (the Ignatius Exercises) and the meditation/contemplation practice.
[+] christophilus|5 years ago|reply
I spent some time discerning as a Trappist, and now have a family. I’ve found the lack of silence to be the biggest challenge. How is your prayer life as a parent?
[+] simonebrunozzi|5 years ago|reply
I'm the poster. I've read the Rule of St. Benedict in Italian, a few years back (I'm from Italy, and specifically from Umbria, the region where St. Benedict was from [0].

Yesterday I saw this on Project Gutenberg and I felt inspired to share it here. I woke up and saw it on the front page, which is always an interesting little thing that kind of makes my day.

I would be really interested in hearing more about your experience in the monastery, if you're willing to share.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benedict_of_Nursia

[+] h2odragon|5 years ago|reply
Say on; first hand experience in this is rare. What did you discover you missed most on returning to "the real world"? was a year enough time?
[+] afpx|5 years ago|reply
I would love to hear about your experiences. Do you have a blog?
[+] aaron-santos|5 years ago|reply
What I find more interesting than the rules themselves is in which ways were they broken. With any system of rules (and the more complex the better), there are bound to be omissions or conflicts which result in gray areas or loop holes.

While some monasteries were strict regardless, others pushed the boundaries. Relating to "CHAPTER 39 On the Measure of Food" for example, monk's meals were supposed to "have two cooked dishes". On the other hand, monks could accept gifts from the abbot "And it shall be in the Abbot’s power to decide to whom it shall be given". Naturally in some refectories, the abbot would receive dishes which he would then direct to other tables thus skirting the two dishes rule.

If you're interested in this and more, Max Miller's Medieval Rule Breakers[1] episode has many more examples

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zz0y1d6IIpY

Edit: It seems as selimthegrim has beaten me to the punch with the link

[+] mjh2539|5 years ago|reply
The rule was advisory in any case; there are multiple points at which St. Benedict advises that the abbot modify things if they had a better way of doing things; the rule of St. Benedict itself is based on several rules that predate it (which are obviously not identical to it).
[+] teleforce|5 years ago|reply
This is probably where the bad cliche "rules are meant to be broken" came from. Perhaps St Benedict had missed the note of "Rules Making 101", never make up any rules that cannot and impossible to be followed.

As I mentioned in my other comments where God in the Quran has exposed and cautioned the monks (in Chapter "Hadid" or "Iron") who were not observing their own made up rules during their monastic period seeking God's good pleasure, for the exercise of monasticsm that were not originally prescribed or enjoined in their own God's scriptures, oh the irony! Pardon the pun :-)

[+] science4sail|5 years ago|reply
From Chapter 3

> Whenever any important business has to be done in the monastery, let the Abbot call together the whole community and state the matter to be acted upon. Then, having heard the brethren’s advice, let him turn the matter over in his own mind and do what he shall judge to be most expedient. The reason we have said that all should be called for counsel is that the Lord often reveals to the younger what is best.

> But if the business to be done in the interests of the monastery be of lesser importance, let him take counsel with the seniors only. It is written, “Do everything with counsel, and you will not repent when you have done it.”

This is certainly an interesting take on "new hires bring fresh new ideas."

[+] jchallis|5 years ago|reply
Atheist fan speaking up for Benedict and his rule. My education was entirely organized by Benedictine nuns who internalized this rule and lived it daily. The focus on the importance of daily discipline made a big impression on me. Like the military, see an organization make short term sacrifices for longer term objectives made a big impression on me and how I spend my time.

Ora et labora.

[+] bodegajed|5 years ago|reply
Yeah the benedictine life is cool with me. I consider my self as non-religious and I follow some aspects of Asceticism like abstaining from eating meat and just content with simple pleasures like playing the guitar and doing arts. I also removed my self from social media. I always work and don't take holidays. I'm done with life based on consumerism
[+] Cthulhu_|5 years ago|reply
While it's not for everyone, I do believe everyone should be in an environment for an X amount of time in their life to learn basic discipline, ideally having to do with taking care of themselves and their environment. Things like food / cooking, regularity, hygiene, tidiness, and just getting on with things.
[+] diegoholiveira|5 years ago|reply
Those rules help the Church preserve the ancient knowledge until Gutenberg. As a Catholic, I'm devout of St. Benedict because the creation of monasteries have a huge impact of the human knowledge.
[+] jawns|5 years ago|reply
"We read, it is true, that wine is by no means a drink for monks; but since the monks of our day cannot be persuaded of this, let us at least agree to drink sparingly and not to satiety, because 'wine makes even the wise fall away.'"

I'm a Catholic, and this is the rule that amuses me the most.

The monks were willing to give up most material possessions and submit to a life of poverty, obedience, and sexual abstinence... but the one thing they couldn't be persuaded to give up was the hooch.

[+] jonah|5 years ago|reply
I've always liked Catholic writer G.K. Chesterton's take:

“Drink because you are happy, but never because you are miserable. Never drink when you are wretched without it, or you will be like the grey-faced gin-drinker in the slum; but drink when you would be happy without it, and you will be like the laughing peasant of Italy. Never drink because you need it, for this is rational drinking, and the way to death and hell. But drink because you do not need it, for this is irrational drinking, and the ancient health of the world.”

[+] sixo|5 years ago|reply
"...But where the circumstances of the place are such that not even the measure prescribed above can be supplied, but much less or none at all, let those who live there bless God and not murmur. Above all things do we give this admonition, that they abstain from murmuring."

But if we run out, above all there will be no complaining.

[+] analog31|5 years ago|reply
I'm sure it depended on geography and time period, but I've read that it wasn't always possible to drink water due to cholera. There may have been a necessity of mixing in at least some wine with the water, to disinfect it. Some have gone so far as to suggest that the arrival of tea from China, which required boiling the water, resulted in a bit of an intellectual boost in Europe.

There were many monasteries where beer and wine making were part of their business model.

[+] tenpies|5 years ago|reply
I always considered it more of a reflection on practicality. There is going to be wine around the monastery, if only because it is necessary for Mass. Therefore, you cannot really ban wine, so are you really going to dedicate a group of monks to the sole task of cellar guard duty?
[+] tamentis|5 years ago|reply
I spent 2 weeks in a benedictine monastery in Italy, about 2 months ago. I think these were some of the most influential weeks of my life. I really hope I can write something useful for others, but the more I digest the experience, the more I think people need to do that themselves and come to their own conclusions.
[+] agumonkey|5 years ago|reply
Yeah I was curious about your experience but at the same time the wondering and living it without prior info may be better.

What made you go and what made you leave though ?

[+] waihtis|5 years ago|reply
Do share your experience if you'd like. I think a lot of people would find it interesting.
[+] jxramos|5 years ago|reply
Does anyone know if there's something on par with Standard Ebooks quality and "remastering scrutiny" with a focus for old religious books like the above?

> Major religious texts from modern world religions, like the Bible or the Koran, will not be accepted. Texts about religion will usually be accepted. Texts from historical religious movements that were culturally influential but are now defunct, or are otherwise not significant in modern times, might be accepted; ask first. https://standardebooks.org/contribute/accepted-ebooks

[+] tzs|5 years ago|reply
Some of these seem quite strange, probably because I don’t have the right background to infer the proper context. For example, chapter 69:

> Care must be taken that no monk presume on any ground to defend another monk in the monastery, or as it were to take him under his protection, even though they be united by some tie of blood-relationship. Let not the monks dare to do this in any way whatsoever, because it may give rise to most serious scandals. But if anyone breaks this rule, let him be severely punished.

[+] crististm|5 years ago|reply
That is not so strange. I've seen it in similar forms elsewhere. It basically means you don't actually know what's in a man's mind and if it's found that you protected a deceitful person you're worse than if you let the things unfold by themselves. For example, you guarantee for a friend that you 'know' could not do something bad. You actually don't know.
[+] forgotmypw17|5 years ago|reply
It sounds like an attempt to discourage cliques?
[+] idclip|5 years ago|reply
Strong dhamma - thank you. I frequent budhist monasteries myself - i see how all prophets are indeed one, and how budha, christ and allah and all other gods stem from that one thing which we encounter after long meditations and prayer finally takes away our anger and hurt to open that door which cannot be closed.

I have a grievance always with “it” for making it so hard for the most of us to access. But i practice.

I wish you all find the power to forgive your enemies, and discover the hidden ones within us all.

[+] wolfhumble|5 years ago|reply
> i see how all prophets are indeed one, and how budha, christ and allah and all other gods stem from that one thing which we encounter after long meditations and prayer finally takes away our anger and hurt to open that door which cannot be closed.

There certainly are teachings that one might find in different religions, but to say that "all prophets are indeed one" and "how budha, christ and allah and all other gods stem from that one thing which we encounter after long meditations and prayer . . . .", does not match up with what is taught in buddhism, christianity and islam.

In buddhism the goal is Nirvana, which is reached after extinction of greed, aversion and ignorance, leading to release from the cycle of rebirth.[1]

In christianity, the saviour is Jesus: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me", [John 14:6], and "But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin". [1 John 1:7]

And the result of faith in Jesus is heaven, which is described in this way (a couple of glimpses): "Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,” for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. [Revelation 21:1-2] "They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever."[Revelation 22:5]

In islam, one of the five pilars is: "I bear witness that there is no deity but God, and I bear witness that Muhammad is the messenger of God."[2]

Salvation in the afterlife: "According to the Quran, the basic criterion for salvation in the afterlife is the belief in the oneness of God (tawḥīd), angels of God, revealed books of God, all messengers of God, as well as repentance to God, and doing good deeds. Though one must do good deeds and believe in God, salvation can only be attained through God's judgment.[3] "Jannah is described as an eternal dwelling (Q3:136), with its supreme felicity and greatest bliss being God's good pleasure (Q9:72)".[4]

The teachings in buddhism, christianity and islam are therefore very different, and points to completely different ways of salvation and afterlife. They all can't be true at the same time.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_(Buddhism)

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahada

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jannah#Muslims

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jannah#Quran

[+] dwd|5 years ago|reply
I think there's a lesson in Chapter 6 for most (if not all) politicians. Though they're probably a lost cause when it comes to Chapter 7.
[+] jkingsbery|5 years ago|reply
For a pretty good book describing how to apply this rule in modern life, see "Seeking God: The Way of St. Benedict" by Esther de Waal.
[+] Rokesmith|5 years ago|reply
Lovely to see this here, from another atheist who reads it often for the great wisdom within.

Some favorites:

"When two monks meet they should each try to be the first to show respect to the other,"and, the abbot must “arrange everything that the strong have something to yearn for and the weak have nothing to run from.”

[+] teleforce|5 years ago|reply
This is probably one of the oldest complete manuscripts that I've (partly) read in addition to the Tsun Szu's The Art of War and the Bible.

It is interesting to note that monasticism is neither prescribed nor enjoined in the Bible, in both the Old and the New Testaments [1]. It is, however, mentioned in the Quran that monasticism is rather an invention by the People of the Books namely Christians and Jews [2]. According to the Quran, it's invented for the monks to seek God's good pleasure, but apparently most of the monks do not observe it as it ought to have been observed. Perhaps this book and manual from St. Benedict provided us with the most authentic and comprehensive descriptions of the rules of the monks' observations during the classical antiquity. By reading the rules I can appreciate why the monks have failed observe them ;-). Adding to the fact that it predates the Quran, these type of observations that were probably being referred to by the Quran.

Fun fact, there is an Ashtiname (Book of Peace), a letter sent by Muhammad to the Saint Catherine's Monastery [3]. The purpose is to guarantee the safety of its monks living there against any potential aggression by the Muslim individuals or army. Given the monastery is still exist and standing today despite of being there for more than a thousand years under Islamic government rule is probably the testament of the effectiveness of the covenant provided by the Ashtiname.

[1]https://theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com/2013/12/12/monasticism...

[2]https://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=57&verse=26...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashtiname_of_Muhammad