Copyright

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 2967
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Copyright

Postby Alex123 » Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:04 pm

Hi Mikenz66,

mikenz66 wrote:A key reason for keeping to the precepts is to make us "blameless", so that if anyone accuses us of wrongdoing we are confident that is it not the case.


In real life, sometimes situations are far more complex. A soldier must obey orders and kill the other person ("the enemy"). This is fully legal and blameless in western society. Yet it is not according to Dhamma. So worldly conventions are not always inline with the Dhamma. What is legal in one country, can be illegal in another. Which to trust?
"dust to dust...."

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 10800
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1001
Location: New Zealand

Re: Copyright

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:14 pm

Alex123 wrote: Which to trust?

Whether it makes you feel blamable.

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 5876
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Copyright

Postby Cittasanto » Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:34 pm

suddhi asuddhi paccattaṃ - the purity or impurity of ones actions is known by oneself Ajahn Chah - Suffering On The Road. The Collected Teachings of Ajahn Chah Volume 3 Talks on Renunciation pp193

this is an interesting article
http://sasanarakkha.org/articles/labels/vinaya.html

Ajahn Varado has also done interesting work on the Parajika rules which I will share when I have found the site.

EDIT - It is Varado.org but it seams down at the moment.
Last edited by Cittasanto on Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 2967
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Copyright

Postby Alex123 » Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:38 pm

mikenz66 wrote:
Alex123 wrote: Which to trust?

Whether it makes you feel blamable.

:anjali:
Mike


And if it does not make one feel blamable?
"dust to dust...."

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 10800
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1001
Location: New Zealand

Re: Copyright

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:42 pm

Alex123 wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:
Alex123 wrote: Which to trust?

Whether it makes you feel blamable.

And if it does not?

Then you won't feel disturbed or agitated if you are blamed.

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 5876
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Copyright

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:04 am

just to note the first four precepts of the five precepts are worldly/society blameable precepts so if it is blameable by the world/society then it doesn't really matter if one doesn't feel ashamed or not, it is a breach of the precept.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 10800
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1001
Location: New Zealand

Re: Copyright

Postby mikenz66 » Mon Feb 27, 2012 1:26 am

Sure, I'm certainly not advocating that it's OK to rob or kill someone as long as you don't feel bad about it. And if something is clearly illegal it should be avoided.

I was talking exclusively about the grey areas, and in those cases I think that examining one's conscience is more useful than obsessing over legal technicalities. An approach which, in my experience, usually indicates that the obssessor knows something is wrong, but is trying to justify it anyway.

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 5876
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Copyright

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:00 am

mikenz66 wrote:Sure, I'm certainly not advocating that it's OK to rob or kill someone as long as you don't feel bad about it. And if something is clearly illegal it should be avoided.

I was talking exclusively about the grey areas, and in those cases I think that examining one's conscience is more useful than obsessing over legal technicalities. An approach which, in my experience, usually indicates that the obssessor knows something is wrong, but is trying to justify it anyway.

:anjali:
Mike

I didn't think you were suggesting that, but as this topic has come up again I felt it would be prudent to note the technical aspect for those not fully versed in the precepts.

but I did see a video (possibly here on DW) in the past few days about this, saying a copy is not theft as with theft it is something taken not able to be used again, whereas a copy does not remove the original item.
this is fair enough, but what about identity theft? someone is only copied so making use of the money of the original wouldn't really be theft as it would be them (ver2) using it? or how about two people wanting to have a fling she is married, so if he steals her husbands identity, would that now not be an affair, and thus sexual misconduct?
at the end of the day an identity is only intellectual property so carries no substance, just the same way all intelectual property can not be stolen...

and if anyone can not guess yes I am being facetious.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 2967
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 6

Re: Copyright

Postby Alex123 » Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:01 am

Cittasanto wrote:just to note the first four precepts of the five precepts are worldly/society blameable precepts .


When soldier kills enemies, then he is a hero. In some worldly cases killing is considered to be good and legal. This doesn't correlate with dhamma where killing is always bad. So what is legal in society is not always good in Dhamma.
"dust to dust...."

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 5876
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Copyright

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:54 am

Alex123 wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:just to note the first four precepts of the five precepts are worldly/society blameable precepts .


When soldier kills enemies, then he is a hero. In some worldly cases killing is considered to be good and legal. This doesn't correlate with dhamma where killing is always bad. So what is legal in society is not always good in Dhamma.

You do know these are different rules and have no overlap, except for the area in which they are found blameable!
but you should be aware that it is the intention that is the deciding factor, and the intent to kill on a worldly level can have other nuances to it not covered or applicable to theft, which is always the objects removal without the owners consent being the deciding factor on a worldly level.
there are other reasons for taking something than theft, such as not knowing, but this doesn't necessarily effect it legally, but can Dhammicly.
the Buddha admitted that he could not think of a way to rule without imprisoning others, or having to send warriors out to war (reference not found sorry) when challenged by Mara, yet no such understanding of the duties a king has and those who serve under him has been shown for theft.
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 5876
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Which number is larger than 1000 and less than 1002: 1
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Copyright

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:27 am

here is a link to the video mentioned above
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fw-MFeR8 ... lf=mh_lolz
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."


Return to “General Theravāda discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests