Monk's financial technology

It seems that there are more temples than convenience stores in Japan as a whole.
So there are all kinds of people.
There are probably wealthy temples, such as large temples, but temples alone cannot eat
There are also monks who have side jobs.
Also, it costs a reasonable amount of money to maintain a large temple.
Rebuilding the main hall would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
However, if you think about it from the original form of religion, financial technology is also
This might be strange.
However, not wasting precious money received from parishioners
I think it's important.
However, since there are people who lose money, there are also people who make money in the economy.
If you think that you are returning the money you have received from the parishioners again,
Does that even make sense?
However, when it comes to collecting it again as a donation, it's another problem.
Matsu-kun himself should think about what kind of people, what kind of temples, and what kind of religion are important.

Matsu-kun

This is Kawaguchi Hidetoshi. This is my humble answer to the question.

Unless it is a large temple in the head temple class, I think most temples and monks don't have enough financial resources to be able to do financial technology.

A sales person from a major securities company came insistently to Zetsuji and was brought to talk about asset management, but since there was no financial leeway, and due to the nature of a public service corporation called a religious corporation, it was impossible to dabble in high-risk financial products, and furthermore, they were not approved by the responsible board of directors (I haven't even bought government bonds since there are no management rules or regulations).

I think the background of the temporary recommendation for asset management to religious corporations is strongly influenced by the idea of SRI (social responsibility investment), which is expanding in scale in Europe and the United States.

For example, community investments such as international financial facility bonds (vaccine bonds) for vaccinations, environmentally friendly investment bonds such as green purchases, etc., are probably anticipating the merit of being easily tolerated by religious corporations and public service corporations, such as environmentally friendly investment bonds such as green purchases, etc., but to be honest, I know there are things where it is difficult to anticipate profits from asset management through investment in these.

Actually, I understood the significance of the high public utility of vaccine bonds, and it is absolutely impossible to buy them at a temple, but I left them because I had no plans to get married at the time, but although they had a high yield, they were foreign currency-linked, and the risk was still high, and while it declined from the time of purchase, they reached maturity, and eventually lost money. In the end, I think I lost 20% of my eyesight.

Well, even so, if there are tens of thousands of children who can be saved, I was naturally prepared for risk first, so I wasn't thinking that it was a loss, and on the contrary, I was satisfied that I was able to do a good job.

Hypothetically, the Koyasan Shingon sect's asset management is also highly SRI, and if I had explained that, I don't know that much criticism... I don't know the reality.

However, in any case, it is important to return money such as offerings received for the Buddha as far as possible in accordance with the Buddha's wishes (public benefit/philanthropy, the rise of Buddhism, etc.), and I know that it is still unforgivable to use it for personal gain, selfishness, or arrogance.

Kawaguchi Hidetoshi Gassho

Since a bozu is the head of a ward (the monk's house), is it originally almost synonymous with the chief priest? However, in general, the word bozu does not indicate a chief priest, and I feel that it is a broken phrase for a monk.
If people ask if the boy is doing financial technology, there are probably people who actually do that. However, I don't think it's popular.

Incidentally, there is a difference between a priest and a monk. Since monks are disciples of the Buddha, they should concentrate on refining their minds, and economic notions are unnecessary. However, the chief priest would need a proper sense of money in order to maintain the temple. Since ancient times, temples and shrines have had “lottery tickets,” etc., and I think chief priests with high management ability have increased the size of the temple. In that sense, it cannot be said that it is bad for the chief priest to do financial technology. However, temples are not one-man managed by the chief priest, and they must be managed by the chief priest as representative officer and multiple responsible officers, so a proper line should be drawn there. Wouldn't it be better to make a lot of profit and use it for the maintenance of the precincts and the world? However, if you do it to fatten your stomach, even if it's 100 yen, all believers will frown.

It's true that being a parishioner alone is difficult to maintain, but that goes for any job. Everyone is working hard to maintain their company, store, and family. I think the chief priest who complains that it's going to be difficult should be quickly dismissed. This is because there are many monks burning with hope that it is difficult, but they want to do it and become the chief priest.

Matsu-kun. I'm Tetsuya Urakami from Nagomi-an.
I'm completely unfamiliar with financial technology or stocks (then I'm likely to be told not to answer), but I'll write what I felt a little bit.

From time to time, I hear stories about how they failed by managing assets at large temples, head temples, etc.
I wonder why I have to do that. I had a feeling that whether it went well or failed, they wouldn't be well thought of either way.
In particular, the method that came up in the question this time doesn't seem to aim for co-prosperity while supporting companies, and it seems like a money game, and it makes me frown

Certainly, money is needed to maintain and operate a temple. I think the precincts and temples with large buildings but few parishioners are in great distress. We should search for various methods and make an effort to protect temples that have continued from generation to generation.

However, Buddhism is a teaching that preaches impermanence. It doesn't matter what the sect or temple pretends to be, and I don't feel that it is appropriate to change blood lineage if it has to survive no matter what you do.
Also, it seems that there are monks whose primary purpose is to make money, but they are no longer monks, and I don't think the place where they are is a temple.

It's a difficult issue between ideals and reality, but I myself would like to be careful not to mix up goals and means.

Even if idols and artists are very popular on their own, most of their income comes from the office after all. Even if they become independent, they will ❝ be erased ❞ by the industry without the support of the office.
When it comes to the monk industry, it is said that monks are fine without taxes, but as a matter of fact, each temple has religious expenses such as the main office and head temple, religious affairs expenses, parish expenses, rewards, benefits, (*'｀) bad? The reality is that an industry tax called a benefit, an industry annual contribution, is levied on something. These are absorbed by the main office and head temple of each denomination in the form of dedication. that annual contribution rate? The bigger the temple, the more it takes. Financially struggling temples are having a hard time.
However, there are cases where the way the collected funds are managed deviates from religious activities and becomes a problem depending on who manages them and how. Depending on who hands you leave knives, powers, and weapons, the way they are used may be mistaken.
I have heard that even in our industry, there were people who caused huge losses by mistakenly managing collected funds. It's a pity.
Unfortunately, there are people who forget their position as monks and monks, fall into a bottomless swamp by being deceived by good stories from others.
In the final part of the movie “Mother Teresa,” Mother Teresa looked at the bottled water that was lined up at the meeting and asked, “How much is it?” I asked, and there was a scene where they disbanded a meeting where they lost sight of the origin due to the high price of that water.
It must be said that if they forget the main path of religion and pursue only profit, or if only strengthening the religious community becomes the main path, it has gone astray, even if it advocates the name of religion.

　In order to inherit the law, temples must be protected, and we cannot remain indifferent about money. However, what I talk about with my friends is about the number of memorial services and funerals and necessary expenses, and there is almost no talk about financial technology. The chief priests of temples that do not consist only of offerings work part-time or go on the mission.

I also used to work for securities companies, and temples are certainly promising targets. It's not that there aren't people like Oda Mudo in the olden days, and there are certainly temples with amazing income. However, since we don't know anything from the outside, even the financial details, they are doing business as they see fit. A new salesman jumps into the business in early spring, but it's unbearable to refuse because they look at their old self.

Being in a world that has nothing to do with earning money is the meaning of a monk's existence, and I think it is a monk's pride that they don't have speculative funds.