Is there any levels of bad deeds

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
whynotme
Posts: 743
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by whynotme »

CoreyNiles92 wrote:Ahh well, I enjoyed my time learning about Buddhism while it lasted I had a completely different understanding on it's teachings. I don't value myself more than any other, so I do not wish to embark on a journey to become of greater value than anyone else.
No, Buddhism isn't about becoming a greater value person than everyone else, and anyone who want to become a greater value person than everyone else can not advance in this path. In regards to killing arahant, I have a simile:

A senior member of a government, he wish to bring benefit and happiness to people, he is not selfish. Because of that attitude, he has a greater value than a robber, a cheater, a terrorist. So if anyone want to harm him, the police will protect him better than normal people. And if you kill him, even you get the same punishment as killing other, people will hate you more, they may attack you, curse you, revenge you, because you killed a good person to them. That is how cause and effect, or kamma works, killing good people is worse than killing bad people. And the arahant is a very good and kind person to anyone.

Here is another simile:
When in self defence, you killed someone, then you will get ease punishment. But if you killed someone to rob his assets, then you can get penalty because in this case you have much more bad actions and thoughts. Like that, if you meet a bad person, you can get angry an harm them, or kill them. But if you meet an arahant, who is pleasant to meet, who doesn't talk harshly, doesn't harm, doesn't cheat, doesn't kill, and you are angry with him, or kill him, in this case you do a much more bad action than than in cases you kill a robber or a terrorist. And because you do more bad actions, your kamma is worse.

The one who don't value himself more than other is actually better than the one who value himself more than other. And Buddhism is not the journey to become a more valued person, but a journey to become a happier person by destroying ignorance, hatred and greed.

Regards
Please stop following me
xtracorrupt
Posts: 97
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 1:47 pm

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by xtracorrupt »

Cittasanto wrote:
Mawkish1983 wrote:With regards to neutralising kamma, my understanding was that effect always follows cause and cannot be avoided by making new causes. I cannot think of any references to this right now.
Angulimala is a good example of not cutting off bad kamma.
he became an Arahant yet still had to meet the results of his actions. sure he didn't recieve all before death, but his attainment didn't nullify the actions done.
My intention thinks this is an amazing example
theres is no need for needing
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:01 am

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by seeker242 »

CoreyNiles92 wrote:
LonesomeYogurt wrote:There are definitely actions more or less wholesome than one another. For example, killing an Arahant guarantees rebirth in Hell whereas murdering an unenlightened person does not.
In fact if this is true, I am 100% done with Buddhism, and will be moving along to being a simple unenlightened being of lesser value than the great and mighty Arahant superiors.
I think you misunderstand why killing an Arahant makes worse kamma. It would be a shame to completely abandon the Buddha's teaching over a misunderstanding IMO.

:namaste:
CoreyNiles92
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:26 am

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by CoreyNiles92 »

I always make an attempt to understand all that is offered to me as far as wisdom goes. But I found myself rejecting this idea that killing an Arahant guarantees rebirth in hell, whereas killing an unenlightened person does not.

Punishment requires mandate, which implies authority. That being said, if the Buddha believed taking the life of an Arahant would guarantee rebirth in hell for punishment, that with authority he has decided so.

So given that an authoritative judgement has been given on the subject, actions spark reactions. The reaction to the act of murdering someone has it's natural order, such as causing grief and guilt, as well as making it easier to murder again, the biological reaction is that a person will realize their moral crime, and find that in comparison most other moral atrocities might be excused, and they will be driven back to a primal state of acting on biological response rather than with logic, and a moral compass. And the artificial response implemented by humans, would be punishing someone for a crime, or passing judgement as to what punishment any particular crime deserves.

So if one were to say, killing an Arahant warrants greater punishment than killing an unenlightened being, this is an artificial response to the act of murder, the response is based on circumstance. To make a proper judgement you must weigh certain factors, such as value, circumstance, and reason. The issue I am having here, is the idea of making judgement over a persons life, based on value. Because I personally believe it to be impossible to place any more or less value on a persons life, compared to another. All life is precious and valuable beyond measure, and no life is of greater or lesser importance than the next.

When given the original thought, I saw only that an Arahant, and an unenlightened being were being compared in regards to punishment for their murder. No other details were given. All of this being said, with no details but their position in life being given, any judgement passed on them will be based purely on the value of their lives in comparison to eachother. Therefore placing an Arahant at higher value than an unenlightened being, leading to the decision if ever placed in a situation to choose, that one would spare an Arahant before sparing an unenlightened being because an Arahant is of greater value. This idea works only without a moral compass, which seems to be against the very idea of Buddhism.
Mawkish1983
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by Mawkish1983 »

It's not about value. It's not about punishment. Killing an arahant prevents all the skillful actions he would perform, removing all the potential merit. Other deaths are still subject to dependent origination and rebecoming. By killing an arahant you cause a far wider effect. Causality. That is all.

The Buddha recognised this.
CoreyNiles92
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:26 am

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by CoreyNiles92 »

Thank you, I couldn't have seen an explanation so profound on my own. I understand now. I shouldn't be so hasty to discredit anything before trying to understand.
User avatar
LonesomeYogurt
Posts: 900
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:24 pm
Location: America

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by LonesomeYogurt »

CoreyNiles92 wrote:Thank you, I couldn't have seen an explanation so profound on my own. I understand now. I shouldn't be so hasty to discredit anything before trying to understand.
It's also important to remember that intent is the driving force behind an action's moral value. The amount of hatred or delusion that a person would need to make them murder an arahant is far greater than the amount needed to kill an average person; an arahant is blameless, without fault, and thus only someone consumed with great, violent hate or incredible delusion could ever bring themselves to murder someone who was literally incapable of harming others.
Gain and loss, status and disgrace,
censure and praise, pleasure and pain:
these conditions among human beings are inconstant,
impermanent, subject to change.

Knowing this, the wise person, mindful,
ponders these changing conditions.
Desirable things don’t charm the mind,
undesirable ones bring no resistance.

His welcoming and rebelling are scattered,
gone to their end,
do not exist.
- Lokavipatti Sutta

Stuff I write about things.
C J
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 6:37 pm
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by C J »

CoreyNiles92 wrote: And enlightenment is freedom from Karma, you act morally righteous not intentionally, but naturally. Good deeds come about on their own, rather than by decision.

You could have 1,000 Positive Karmic seeds and 1,000 negative Karmic seeds. This won't put you into enlightenment smack in the middle, and it won't negate. You will have 1,000 experiences in life that will bring about positive or negative feelings based on the actions that created the seeds.
I don't believe that is true.
There are examples suggesting otherwise such as;

Buddha once had a headache. He related it to a kamma vipaka of a past life.
As "Cittasanto" pointed out earlier the case of Angulimala, he still had to suffer his bad deeds.
I can list more examples.

As I understand, enlightenment is not freedom from Karma. You still have to suffer even if you attained enlightenment.

As I understand enlightenment is a well developed mental state where you don't have lobha, dosa, moha (Three Fires: greed, hatred and delusion. http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/ebdha102.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;).
Enlightenment is freedom from accumulating more bad kamma, not freedom from Karma.
C J
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 6:37 pm
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by C J »

As killing an arahat is much more worst than killing a layperson, it seems like development of the mind plays a big role in this context.

So killing a clever person should be worst than killing a dumb person.

So killing an human should be much more worst than killing an animal;
same way killing an animal of higher mental power (such as a monkey or an elephant) should be worst than killing an animal with a lower mental power (such as a worm, an ant or a mosquito).

And killing a clever monkey should be worst than killing a dumb monkey.

What do you think?
Mawkish1983
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by Mawkish1983 »

It's not all about intelligence.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by daverupa »

Unconjecturable topics are unconjecturable.

AN 4.77

"The results of kamma is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it."
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
C J
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 6:37 pm
Location: Sri Lanka

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by C J »

daverupa wrote:Unconjecturable topics are unconjecturable.

AN 4.77

"The results of kamma is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it."
Thank you for pointing out this.

But it says;
""The [precise working out of the] results of kamma..."
is an unconjecturable.

I'm not trying to understand precise working out of the results of kamma. I know it is not possible.

In Velaama Sutta, Buddha had pointed out levels of good deeds.
So I thought levels of bad deeds also may had pointed out in some sutta.

But it seems like it was not described in-depth compared to descriptions of good deeds.
I could not find any levels other than aanantariya and five precepts.
SarathW
Posts: 21183
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Is there any levels of bad deeds

Post by SarathW »

Hi everyone
There is a misconception that everything is happen due to past kamma. Buddha never said that. According to Buddhism all phenomena’s resulted from Niyamas. There are five Niyamas. (Utu,Bija,Kamma,Dhamma,Citta) Kamma is only one of them.
Please read page 261 of attached link



http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/buddh ... gsurw6.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Post Reply