Venerable members of the Sangha,
Venerable fellows,
honored Buddhaparisada,
Upasaka, Upasaka,
Dear interested,
recently there is a certain increase of wishing to ordain of western people perceive-able, clear because the first Noble truth get current more visible and also old comfortable ways may be now no more that comfortable.
Sometimes, like shortly on a place outside, the question was raised whether it would be proper to use the "economic"-system of the Noble Ones as kind of alternative way to render once life: hard to work, hard to get a job, not best health, no success with romantic relations...
As it was merely approving answered, even by Venerables, it is maybe worthy to point out that the Sublime Buddha had no real visions to make the Sangha and Sasana a kind of "special social network" for the world and with aims to provide the wheel of turning on with what is given in faith in regard of liberation. On the other side it's a total open sozial system for primary those seeing the danger in the world, seeking for paths and fruits toward Unbond and has natural benefical side-effects on common society by increasing encouraging samples for harmlessness, virtue, modesty and generosity.
There had been serial cases where people tried to use the Sangha and the fonds of the Sublime Buddha and his Bhikkhu Sangha in what one might call corrupt way. The case of someone thinking it would be easier to live under the monks, as he had not much skills for work, the case of someone sick, not finding treatment, thinking to use the Sanghas support for cure and then left it again. The case of debtors, thinking to use it as way to run away from looking to solve them, the case of criminals, the case of soldiers, wishing to avoid an upcoming war... in all those "social cases", the Sublime Buddha, at least to preseve the reputation of the Sangha as a Noble Sangha, not a common, to avoid possible reasonable critic, blocked ways that such could be seen as approved and even desireable. Some of those cases are to be avoided to ordain, some would make ordination even invalide if the real reason for ordination would be seen later on.
So generally it's clear, although many Sanghas or even whole nations often kind of missuse it as alternative social network, starting by providing for common education for children and young, especially poor, looking after sick, after drug-issues, teaching worldly arts and skills... most cases, even if not ordained, providing such as service for householders, actually fall into a grave transgression called corrupting families and would require hard treadments to get cleansed again.
In how far "mental wellness services", thinking on organiced meditation-teaching-services wouldn't not fall likewise in this category: one should reflect for oneself.
A "terrible" side-effect of organized social networks where people somehow pay into a kind of "insurance" is that the value of receiving possibility later would easy turn into thoughts of "I have a right" (like most tax-payer would think).
Sure it is clear that if one would not have much material sacrifices made in the past toward those seeking ways outside of trade, one might suffer a little under lack of merits if one day, never having done sacrifices toward the Gems, recluses, Brahmans, deciding for a way in going forth.
Often, if certain social ideas for common aims in the world are addopted in Sanghas, user of such get then used as "worker" like people are working for communities. Not seldom are Bhikkhus and Novices are seen as infrastructor builder (schools, streets...), working on fields or what ever labor not proper and for the Sangha.
All of this ways, very common, sometime argued as "if we don't provide services for the common society, we wouldn't get support" (of what holds just true for Sanghas objecting to turn on in the world), even in traditional countries, not to speak of western, modern monasteries, which are said to be not possible without serving lay-peoples with courses, teachings, medi-events, book-providing, ... are not in the frame of the "Ecosystem of the Noble Ones" founded by the Buddha.
There are also many rules which disallow monks the flow-back of generosity (even intended) into Samsara, forbidding giving gifts received in faith to others then those heading forward, or desire such seemingly. Sure there are cases where such is reasonable and allowed, such as providing ones parents with needed, or those serving for the Sangha...
So the general picture of the Vinaya and the Dhamma makes it veru clear that it's not a alternative social network for all, but a alternative social network, better livelihood, which has a different purpose, that of heading upward and toward Liberation for the individual making use of this path. The maintaining of the community is here secondary, although forming the base for the individual for the time of training till complet independency of any social network.
At the other hand, and such is also often overseen by many, incl. monks, the Sublime Buddha was clear in pointing out that making use of social net-works and offers for common people, purpose, are not proper for his disciples to take on. So he avoided that his Sasana becomes a burden for those carring for worldly generosity. Going after social insurances, health, public offers, taking on food provided for poor, not to speak of making use of traded "free" offers, seeking for costumers and to bind people, what ever isn't clearly offered individual without strings, or for the Sangha at large, are total improper for the Sages and those following the as well.
In this way the Sublime Buddha avoided all possibilities that his Sasana could work out as a burden or even a duty for those not falling for it and giving intentional into it. In this way it can not really become a matter of politic or even harmful for what ever worlds society, staying totally out of common ways of sharing gains within groups outside of the community.
Yet, to go forth, or to make use of the alternative path toward Unbond, does nobody require to pay anything for getting access and askes also nobody if having supported this path before or not, or whether one has trained oneself in slilfull generosity before or not, to fulfill the "perfection" of Generosity for the path, since at least, by going forth (if serious and not with safety fonds stored up here or there in houses), one gives not only all away but stops also the use of common social networks, which by their trading nature and objection, would hinder that such as "left home" even outwardly get completed.
My person thinks to end here at this point, asking like always for rebukes, corrections, and needed fill up of craps if seen, out of compassion, form those more skilled in pointing out the heartwood required for liberation and faith to take on a blameless alternative for an end of suffering.
May one also feel welcome to raise question in additions, especially when doubts in regard of good ways could arise on this or that thought on the said.