I'd feed a starving child before a healthy arahant

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9058
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by SDC »

Sekha wrote:
SDC wrote: You'll NEVER see a plump arahant. Ever. Unless of course it's due to a medical condition they have no control over.
And in virtue of what?
What David said.

If you disagree it is likely that we share different views of the characteristics of an arahant.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Ceisiwr »

santa100 wrote:
clw_uk wrote:Which seems to still rest on a transaction based morality, a business deal
Label it whatever way you like. I'd just call it a win-win..

So you get something as well as the other person?
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Ceisiwr »

santa100 wrote:
clw_uk wrote:Which seems to still rest on a transaction based morality, a business deal
Label it whatever way you like. I'd just call it a win-win..

You could have said you would give it to the hungry, because the arahant would be free from dukkha in relation to hunger


Yet you choose the option that (apparently) gives "you" maximum benefit in terms of "merit"


Once again a business deal, bound up with selfishness and dukkha because of the ego ;)
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Ceisiwr »

David N. Snyder wrote:Image

So you want a Buddhism without cultural accretions? Nothing wrong with that.


:rofl:
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
santa100
Posts: 6799
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by santa100 »

clw_uk wrote:You could have said you would give it to the hungry, because the arahant would be free from dukkha in relation to hunger


Yet you choose the option that (apparently) gives "you" maximum benefit in terms of "merit"


Once again a business deal, bound up with selfishness and dukkha because of the ego
Obviously your solution is not a win-win. Oh, and your 2nd sentence is false since it's not just me who get the benefit. By the way, how do I know if it's not out of your own egoistic and selfish view to keep labeling mine as selfish?
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Ceisiwr »

Obviously your solution is not a win-win. Oh, and your 2nd sentence is false since it's not just me who get the benefit. By the way, how do I know if it's not out of your own egoistic and selfish view to keep labeling mine as selfish?

Well in Buddhist terms, you would give out of compassion and not act in terms that enforce the ego, which your first post strongly implied.

Giving to the hungry child would be more ethical, in Buddhist terms, because the arahant could experience hunger and not be stressed by it. However giving to the arahant, because you get merit, who gives to the child smacks of an egotistical business deal.


And I dont know if i know or not know that you don't know if it is my egoistic intention or not :)
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
dagon
Posts: 526
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:45 am

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by dagon »

Live in the present, be mindful , do what is wholesome, recognise that karma is the mechanism that makes you accountable for you intentions/action but don’t dwell on it (past or future)

OR

Cut the apple in half, have a two way bet and takeaway the reason for people to use questionable speech to each other. :juggling:

Metta
paul
santa100
Posts: 6799
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by santa100 »

clw_uk wrote:Well in Buddhist terms, you would give out of compassion and not act in terms that enforce the ego, which your first post strongly implied.


And I dont know if i know or not know that you don't know if it is my egoistic intention or not
Well, i wouldn't call not making offering to an arahant is real compassion either. By the way, I achieve the same objective of saving the child just like you and further more made some extra other positive contributions.

That's fine that you don't know. That's why I'd be more reserved in passing judgement the next time around.. :smile:
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6490
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Dhammanando »

clw_uk wrote:
To keep one’s precepts merely out of a prudential wish to avoid unpleasant vipākas no doubt bespeaks of an inferior level of motivation, but don't you think it's better than not being motivated towards sīla at all? And I doubt the unkilled bugs would find it in the least sad.
As always that depends on the circumstances.
In what circumstances is it better to act immorally than to act morally out of mere prudence?
Rūpehi bhikkhave arūpā santatarā.
Arūpehi nirodho santataro ti.


“Bhikkhus, the formless is more peaceful than the form realms.
Cessation is more peaceful than the formless realms.”
(Santatarasutta, Iti 73)
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Ceisiwr »

In what circumstances is it better to act immorally than to act morally out of mere prudence?
Your question is loaded from the start. You also haven't defined, or proved, what "immorality" is. Yet no matter, I"ll give you "immorality" (assuming we agree on the definition of the word, which would seem the best starting place).


Yet if you was a time traveler and had the option of killing Hitler as a baby, or letting him live, what would you do?



Or if you hid some Jews, homosexuals and Jehovah's witnesses in your house/monastery, and the SS came knocking, would you lie or tell the truth?

In both cases to kill hitler, and to lie to save the "subhumans", is immoral in "Buddhist" terms, yet the context demands a differenent perspective that colours it.


Therefore assuming you wouldn't give up a gay man to the SS, you would lie due to the situation. Thus context defines, or at least influneces, morality (if it exists). :)
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Sun Sep 15, 2013 3:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
Buckwheat
Posts: 970
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Buckwheat »

manas wrote:If I have an apple in my hand, and before me I see a starving beggar child, and a plump arahant on alms round, I will give the apple to the starving beggar child, yes even if that means I miss out on a million 'merit points' and a thousand years of feasting in Heaven.
It seems likely the arahant would be rather pleased to see you giving the apple to the child, and therefore you would also be giving the arahant a brief moment of pleasure (mudita - altruistic joy).

The Buddha said to give where one feels inspired. Of course there are non-arahants who give with selfish motives, but just because their practice is imperfect does not require one to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Ceisiwr »

The Buddha said to give where one feels inspired. Of course there are non-arahants who give with selfish motives, but just because their practice is imperfect does not require one to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Unless the bath water is position, oes?
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
Buckwheat
Posts: 970
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Buckwheat »

clw_uk wrote:
The Buddha said to give where one feels inspired. Of course there are non-arahants who give with selfish motives, but just because their practice is imperfect does not require one to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Unless the bath water is position, oes?
I don't understand your post. The bathwater is OK to get rid of, it represents the imperfect practice of selfish generosity. What should be protected is the baby, which represents the Buddha's teaching to be generous where one feels inspired, which I believe to mean where there is the greatest perceived need. In the case of the OP, this would mean feeding the starving child. Does that clarify?
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Ceisiwr »

I don't understand your post. The bathwater is OK to get rid of, it represents the imperfect practice of selfish generosity. What should be protected is the baby, which represents the Buddha's teaching to be generous where one feels inspired, which I believe to mean where there is the greatest perceived need. In the case of the OP, this would mean feeding the starving child. Does that clarify?
"Poisonus bath water" was a metaphor for context x :)
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22287
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: I'd feed a starving child before a plump arahant

Post by Ceisiwr »

However I do like the rest of your post atm :)


:group:
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
Post Reply