With the technology of microscopes, they can be.
challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
-
- Posts: 2298
- Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
dharmacorps wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:01 pm You misunderstand Robert's point. Bacteria are not living being by dhamma standards. Microscopes don't change the dhamma.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.htmlI have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Then Ven. Radha went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?"
"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up[1] there, tied up[2] there, one is said to be 'a being.'[3]
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
- confusedlayman
- Posts: 6258
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
- Location: Human Realm (as of now)
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
so arhants are not beings ?Bundokji wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:34 pmdharmacorps wrote: ↑Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:01 pm You misunderstand Robert's point. Bacteria are not living being by dhamma standards. Microscopes don't change the dhamma.https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.htmlI have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Then Ven. Radha went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "'A being,' lord. 'A being,' it's said. To what extent is one said to be 'a being'?"
"Any desire, passion, delight, or craving for form, Radha: when one is caught up[1] there, tied up[2] there, one is said to be 'a being.'[3]
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
Such questions are often linked to craving for being and non-being:
"But, my friend, would there another line of reasoning, in line with which that has not been declared by the Blessed One?"
"There would, my friend. "For one who loves craving, who is fond of craving, who cherishes craving, who does not know or see, as it actually is present, the cessation of craving, there occurs the thought, 'The Tathagata exists after death' or 'The Tathagata does not exist after death' or 'The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death' or 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death.'
"But for one who doesn't love craving, who isn't fond of craving, who doesn't cherish craving, who knows & sees, as it actually is present, the cessation of craving, the thought, 'The Tathagata exists after death' or 'The Tathagata does not exist after death' or 'The Tathagata both exists and does not exist after death' or 'The Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist after death' doesn't occur.
"This, too, is a line of reasoning in line with which that has not been declared by the Blessed One."
"But, my friend, would there another line of reasoning, in line with which that has not been declared by the Blessed One?"
"Now, what more do you want, friend Kotthita? When a monk has been freed from the classification of craving, there exists no cycle for describing him."
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
-
- Posts: 1102
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
There is a reason they are precepts and not blind commandments.salayatananirodha wrote: ↑Mon Mar 22, 2021 3:16 am
i listened and wasn't satisfied with his answer. i thought it was different if you were killing beings invisible to the naked eye, although its not clear to me. i think 'compassion for yourself' is a modern idea. i dont want to give off the idea that i am trying to condemn him or anything. he seems great but this isn't the first time a monk has disappointed me when they talked about killing bugs. if he hadn't said this i would have more confidence - is it me?
It may seem ethically difficult but if it is affecting ones health then getting rid of it is the wise decision. If it generates some mixed kamma then so be it but my feeling is that would be unlikely as one is also stopping harm from being done. The parasites existence is generating negative kamma for itself by inflicting harm, so one would be preventing it from this.
Actually soap doesn't kill bacteria it merely washes them away. Only anti-bacterial soap kills them, which can be minimized in usage if desired.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...
That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."
(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."
(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
- salayatananirodha
- Posts: 1479
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
- Contact:
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
no you're wrong
I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
This is something that unless a Buddha was present, I would Ignore and chalk up to "lost dhamma".
I would kill any being with exception of a human, in self-defense doesn't matter if it's a dog with rabies, or a tick.
As I see it, this part of the dhamma is "lost", i.e. there's a thousand different interpretations, and there is no Buddha present to settle the issue.
So my practical view, is that I do not go out looking to kill anything. I catch flies in my house and release them, but if something threatens my life, then it will be killed.
There's a huge difference between Angulimala intentionally going out of his way to kill people, vs defending your life.
Also, I think wrong speech is a way bigger issue than hypothetical "would you kill situations", as many people needlessly have intentional wrong speech. The average person in a first world country, doesn't go out looking to kill people like Angulimala, but they do go out intentionally having wrong speech.
I would kill any being with exception of a human, in self-defense doesn't matter if it's a dog with rabies, or a tick.
As I see it, this part of the dhamma is "lost", i.e. there's a thousand different interpretations, and there is no Buddha present to settle the issue.
So my practical view, is that I do not go out looking to kill anything. I catch flies in my house and release them, but if something threatens my life, then it will be killed.
There's a huge difference between Angulimala intentionally going out of his way to kill people, vs defending your life.
Also, I think wrong speech is a way bigger issue than hypothetical "would you kill situations", as many people needlessly have intentional wrong speech. The average person in a first world country, doesn't go out looking to kill people like Angulimala, but they do go out intentionally having wrong speech.
There is only one battle that could be won, and that is the battle against the 3 poisons. Any other battle is a guaranteed loss because you're going to die either way.
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
Ajahn Brahmali does not have any idea of very basic Buddhist precepts.i think 'compassion for yourself' is a modern idea.
Killing any form is unwholesome.
There could be a way to get rid of them without killing.
It is pitty a Buddhist monk giving this sort of advice to laypeople.
He is trying to bend the rules to suit his purpose.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=39122&hilit=beesHave I broken the first precept?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
-
- Posts: 1102
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
He clearly said if there was no other means.SarathW wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 8:07 amAjahn Brahmali does not have any idea of very basic Buddhist precepts.i think 'compassion for yourself' is a modern idea.
Killing any form is unwholesome.
There could be a way to get rid of them without killing.
It is pitty a Buddhist monk giving this sort of advice to laypeople.
He is trying to bend the rules to suit his purpose.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=39122&hilit=beesHave I broken the first precept?
He isn't bending the rules.
If a parasite was threatening your health or even life and ridding it through a means which may involve killing it was the only way to be rid of it, that would be the sensible action.
Slavishly and blindly following ideals ritualistically without evaluating the circumstances is not the dhamma. It is arguably one of the fetters even.
Also, morally righteous talk is cheap. In a real situation if one were feeling the effects I highly doubt either yourself or the thread starter would act any differently.
Let us know the next time you fall ill and refuse anti-biotic medications for your welfare and to restore health.
It would be unwise and not recommended.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...
That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."
(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."
(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
Antibiotics eliminate bacteria - not living beings.Let us know the next time you fall ill and refuse anti-biotic medications for your welfare and to restore health
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
I have no problem with people killing.Cause_and_Effect wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 10:04 amHe clearly said if there was no other means.SarathW wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 8:07 amAjahn Brahmali does not have any idea of very basic Buddhist precepts.i think 'compassion for yourself' is a modern idea.
Killing any form is unwholesome.
There could be a way to get rid of them without killing.
It is pitty a Buddhist monk giving this sort of advice to laypeople.
He is trying to bend the rules to suit his purpose.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=39122&hilit=beesHave I broken the first precept?
He isn't bending the rules.
If a parasite was threatening your health or even life and ridding it through a means which may involve killing it was the only way to be rid of it, that would be the sensible action.
Slavishly and blindly following ideals ritualistically without evaluating the circumstances is not the dhamma. It is arguably one of the fetters even.
Also, morally righteous talk is cheap. In a real situation if one were feeling the effects I highly doubt either yourself or the thread starter would act any differently.
Let us know the next time you fall ill and refuse anti-biotic medications for your welfare and to restore health.
It would be unwise and not recommended.
What I am saying is do not try to justify your killing.
Killing due to any reason is breaking the first precept.
What Bhante proposed to make it to a weighty Kamma as it is done with the wrong view as per Abhidhamma.
This is not surprising considering that monks with Ajahan Braham do not accept ABhidhamma.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
-
- Posts: 1102
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:39 am
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
Perhaps...which is why I said precepts are not commandments.SarathW wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 10:12 amI have no problem with people killing.Cause_and_Effect wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 10:04 amHe clearly said if there was no other means.SarathW wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 8:07 am
Ajahn Brahmali does not have any idea of very basic Buddhist precepts.
Killing any form is unwholesome.
There could be a way to get rid of them without killing.
It is pitty a Buddhist monk giving this sort of advice to laypeople.
He is trying to bend the rules to suit his purpose.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=39122&hilit=bees
He isn't bending the rules.
If a parasite was threatening your health or even life and ridding it through a means which may involve killing it was the only way to be rid of it, that would be the sensible action.
Slavishly and blindly following ideals ritualistically without evaluating the circumstances is not the dhamma. It is arguably one of the fetters even.
Also, morally righteous talk is cheap. In a real situation if one were feeling the effects I highly doubt either yourself or the thread starter would act any differently.
Let us know the next time you fall ill and refuse anti-biotic medications for your welfare and to restore health.
It would be unwise and not recommended.
What I am saying is do not try to justify your killing.
Killing due to any reason is breaking the first precept.
There are no if and buts.
We are not living in a heavenly world and the human world is far from perfect. We aspire to keep the precepts at all times but perhaps the world throws us situations on occasion where breaking a precept is regrettably the only option or the most wise choice when all other options are exhuasted.
It is not justifying it but this example highlights a situation where this may the case. The Ven. monk should not be criticized in this way for sharing his reflections of a real world application and not falling into blind dogmatism.
"Therein monks, that Dimension should be known wherein the eye ceases and the perception of forms fades away...the ear... the nose...the tongue... the body ceases and the perception of touch fades away...
That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."
(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
That Dimension should be known wherein mentality ceases and the perception of mind-objects fades away.
That Dimension should be known; that Dimension should be known."
(S. IV. 98) - The Dimension beyond the All
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
You have the free will to do whatever you please to do.Cause_and_Effect wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 10:18 amPerhaps...which is why I said precepts are not commandments.SarathW wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 10:12 amI have no problem with people killing.Cause_and_Effect wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 10:04 am
He clearly said if there was no other means.
He isn't bending the rules.
If a parasite was threatening your health or even life and ridding it through a means which may involve killing it was the only way to be rid of it, that would be the sensible action.
Slavishly and blindly following ideals ritualistically without evaluating the circumstances is not the dhamma. It is arguably one of the fetters even.
Also, morally righteous talk is cheap. In a real situation if one were feeling the effects I highly doubt either yourself or the thread starter would act any differently.
Let us know the next time you fall ill and refuse anti-biotic medications for your welfare and to restore health.
It would be unwise and not recommended.
What I am saying is do not try to justify your killing.
Killing due to any reason is breaking the first precept.
There are no if and buts.
We are not living in a heavenly world and the human world is far from perfect. We aspire to keep the precepts at all times but perhaps the world throws us situations on occasion where breaking a precept is regrettably the only option or the most wise choice when all other options are exhuasted.
It is not justifying it but this example highlights a situation where this may the case. The monk should not be criticized in this way for sharing his reflections of a real world application and not falling into blind dogmatism.
And you reap the fruits.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites
But cooking kills parasites and their eggs. For example, coriander plants and other herbs can have small insects that grow on the plants. If you've had pho soup, you probably had them as well.
There is only one battle that could be won, and that is the battle against the 3 poisons. Any other battle is a guaranteed loss because you're going to die either way.