challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Buddhist ethical conduct including the Five Precepts (Pañcasikkhāpada), and Eightfold Ethical Conduct (Aṭṭhasīla).
User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by salayatananirodha »

I recently wrote to Ajahn Brahmali on suttacentral about something i heard him say several, several months ago:
Sovatthika (salayatananirodha) wrote:Venerable Ajahn,

I want to discuss with you what I heard you say in one of your talks some time ago. It concerns parasites, such as intestinal worms, which do appear to be living beings, and how we as Buddhists should handle them.

[...] You said, to paraphrase, that you think if you were infected with parasites that you would kill them, giving your justification that they are dependent on harming you in order to live. (I can’t find the particular talk, but you might remember?)
[...]

I’ve argued this matter with many laypeople and found myself taking a very difficult position, that taking of life is never acceptable. And I have various sources to justify this, but I know you are no stranger to the suttas, so I will just share this:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.05.than.html wrote:"[2] And furthermore, just as the ocean is stable and does not overstep its tideline; in the same way my disciples do not — even for the sake of their lives — overstep the training rules I have formulated for them… This is the second amazing & astounding quality of this Dhamma & Vinaya because of which, as they see it again & again, the monks take great joy in this Dhamma & Vinaya.
But there are lay people who abide by this rule and would not transgress it so deliberately. I might have harmed or killed a tick somewhat recently out of fear, but I think this is still different, from holding a view that killing is morally acceptable or that it will produce a result that is in any way pleasant.

Bhante, do you not recall bāla-paṇḍita sutta? Killing and maiming lead to bad destinations [...] you would still have to bear the fruit of that kamma. I think it is difficult to reverse the mind that has developed to such a degree that it will kill and will defend killing [...]

Signed, [my real name and where i am from]
i went on to say
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/index.html wrote:"There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones, abandoning the taking of life, abstains from taking life. In doing so, he gives freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings. In giving freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, freedom from oppression to limitless numbers of beings, he gains a share in limitless freedom from danger, freedom from animosity, and freedom from oppression. This is the first gift, the first great gift — original, long-standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the beginning — that is not open to suspicion, will never be open to suspicion, and is unfaulted by knowledgeable contemplatives & brahmans…
https://suttacentral.net/mn115/en/sujato wrote:They understand: ‘It’s impossible for a likable, desirable, agreeable result to come from bad conduct of body, speech, and mind. But it is possible for an unlikable, undesirable, disagreeable result to come from bad conduct of body, speech, and mind.’

They understand: ‘It’s impossible for an unlikable, undesirable, disagreeable result to come from good conduct of body, speech, and mind. But it is possible for a likable, desirable, agreeable result to come from good conduct of body, speech, and mind.’
Granting life to other beings causes a long lifespan; taking life causes a short lifespan.
he responded & said he would address this in his workshop. i went on:
[...] I understand I may not be grasping something properly, however nuanced, and I need much improvement in even basic matters, but I still think the teachings against killing apply universally and without exception. For example, in the simile of the saw he says we should not harbor thoughts of ill will against our would-be murderers. He also teaches a group of boys that if you fear and dislike pain, do not do any evil deed openly or secretly. Cruelty is still cruelty, even when our lives are threatened. I’m not certain I would be able to uphold this standard if my life were under threat but I at least want to have the correct view in order to get a foot in the door.

I’d like to share this with you; I think you translated it. [...]
https://legacy.suttacentral.net/en/pi-tv-bu-vb-pj1 wrote:Then Venerable Mahāmoggallāna approached the Master, bowed down to him, and sat down to one side. He then said,

“At present, Venerable Sir, Verañjā is short of food and afflicted with hunger, with crops blighted and turned to straw. It’s not easy to get by almsfood. Venerable Sir, the under-surface of this great earth is abounding with food, which tastes just like pure honey. It would be good if I could invert the earth so that the monks may enjoy the nutrition in those water-plants.”

“But what will you do, Moggallāna, with those creatures who are living there?”

“I’ll make one of my hands broad, like the great earth, and I’ll make those creatures go there. and I’ll make those creatures go there. Then with the other hand I’ll invert the earth.”

“Please don’t invert the earth, Moggallāna. Those creatures might lose their minds.”

“In that case, Venerable Sir, it would be good if the whole Order of monks could go to Uttarakuru for alms.”

“No, Moggallāna, please don’t pursue this.”
I look forward to hearing from you if you have time. May the fruit of this discussion benefit my relatives. May all beings be at ease and may you be well and be happy, Bhante!
he responded with this talk, indicating that he responded beginning at 1:02:18 (i've linked this with timestamp)



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?
I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by DooDoot »

salayatananirodha wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 3:16 am I recently wrote to Ajahn Brahmali on suttacentral about something i heard him say several, several months ago:
Piya Tan, DooDoot and now Brahmali :spy: :D :twothumbsup:
You said, to paraphrase, that you think if you were infected with parasites that you would kill them, giving your justification that they are dependent on harming you in order to live.
:ugeek:
I’ve argued this matter with many laypeople and found myself taking a very difficult position, that taking of life is never acceptable.
:roll:
And I have various sources to justify this, but I know you are no stranger to the suttas, so I will just share this:
:roll:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.05.than.html wrote:"[2] And furthermore, just as the ocean is stable and does not overstep its tideline; in the same way my disciples do not — even for the sake of their lives — overstep the training rules I have formulated for them… This is the second amazing & astounding quality of this Dhamma & Vinaya because of which, as they see it again & again, the monks take great joy in this Dhamma & Vinaya.
But the Vinaya does not contain any training rule forbidding killing parasites with medicine.
I might have harmed or killed a tick somewhat recently out of fear, but I think this is still different, from holding a view that killing is morally acceptable or that it will produce a result that is in any way pleasant.
When I administered visitors in a monastery, i killed ticks often during the tick season. Step 1, apply mosquito repellent. Step 2, remove carefully with tweezers. It didn't affect my samadhi. Ticks in particular can spread disease. Imagine my dukkha if i didn't help someone remove a tick and that person became seriously and even permanently ill. :shock:
Bhante, do you not recall bāla-paṇḍita sutta? Killing and maiming lead to bad destinations
It appears unlikely the Buddha was referring to parasites. MN 129 says:
29. “Again, when a robber culprit is caught, a wise man sees kings having many kinds of torture inflicted on him…(as in §4)…Then the wise man thinks thus: ‘Because of such evil actions as those, when a robber culprit is caught, kings have many kinds of tortures inflicted on him. Those things are not found in me, and I am not seen engaging in those things.’ This is the second kind of pleasure and joy that a wise man feels here and now.
The above cannot happen for killing parasites.

The law of kamma follows the law of nature. The law of nature does not inflict punishment for killing parasites. A stream-enterer is free from sīlabbata-parāmāsa due to direct insight into the internal & knowable effects of states of mind. A stream-enterer is unconcerned if they must kill parasites because kamma is intention and the intention is to avoid ill-health due to a predator.

Imo :smile:
“Master Gotama, it is said: ‘A directly visible Dhamma, a directly visible Dhamma.’ In what way is the Dhamma directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise?”

(1) “Brahmin, one excited by lust, overcome by lust, with mind obsessed by it, intends for his own affliction, for the affliction of others, or for the affliction of both, and he experiences mental suffering and dejection. But when lust is abandoned, he does not intend for his own affliction, for the affliction of others, or for the affliction of both, and he does not experience mental suffering and dejection. One excited by lust, overcome by lust, with mind obsessed by it, engages in misconduct by body, speech, and mind. But when lust is abandoned, he does not engage in misconduct by body, speech, and mind. One excited by lust, overcome by lust, with mind obsessed by it, does not understand as it really is his own good, the good of others, or the good of both. But when lust is abandoned, he understands as it really is his own good, the good of others, and the good of both. It is in this way, brahmin, that the Dhamma is directly visible … to be personally experienced by the wise.

(2) “One full of hate, overcome by hatred …

(3) “One who is deluded, overcome by delusion, with mind obsessed by it, intends for his own affliction, for the affliction of others, or for the affliction of both, and he experiences mental suffering and dejection. But when delusion is abandoned, he does not intend for his own affliction, for the affliction of others, or for the affliction of both, and he does not experience mental suffering and dejection. One who is deluded, overcome by delusion, with mind obsessed by it, engages in misconduct by body, speech, and mind. But when delusion is abandoned, he does not engage in misconduct by body, speech, and mind. One who is deluded, overcome by delusion, with mind obsessed by it, does not understand as it really is his own good, the good of others, or the good of both. But when delusion is abandoned, he understands as it really is his own good, the good of others, and the good of both. It is in this way, too, that the Dhamma is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, applicable, to be personally experienced by the wise.”

https://suttacentral.net/an3.54/en/bodhi
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by salayatananirodha »

you are conflating intention with motivation
the intention is to kill, the motivation is to preserve life, health, property, etc
by your logic it would be morally acceptable to kill someone because they invaded your home
because your motivation was to defend your home
but your intention is to kill, and theres the kamma
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.021x.than.html wrote:"Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves.
I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested
dharmacorps
Posts: 2298
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by dharmacorps »

Suggesting you have to live with disease causing parasites in your body is one extreme view for which I see no basis in the canon or vinaya as has been said.
User avatar
WindDancer
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 3:47 am
Location: Harrison County, IN, USA

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by WindDancer »

salayatananirodha wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 4:50 am you are conflating intention with motivation
the intention is to kill, the motivation is to preserve life, health, property, etc
by your logic it would be morally acceptable to kill someone because they invaded your home
because your motivation was to defend your home
but your intention is to kill, and theres the kamma
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.021x.than.html wrote:"Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves.
:goodpost:

Thanks.
Live Gently....
User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by salayatananirodha »

dharmacorps wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 8:56 pm Suggesting you have to live with disease causing parasites in your body is one extreme view for which I see no basis in the canon or vinaya as has been said.
because intentionally killing beings is akusala and intentionally not killing beings is kusala? seems simple
WindDancer wrote: Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:08 am
salayatananirodha wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 4:50 am [...]
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.021x.than.html wrote:"Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves.
:goodpost:

Thanks.
you're welcome
I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested
User avatar
Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta
Posts: 2168
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:06 pm

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta »

  • If plagued with intentions, "killing" becomes killing.
:heart:
𝓑𝓾𝓭𝓭𝓱𝓪 𝓗𝓪𝓭 𝓤𝓷𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓬𝓪𝓵𝓵𝔂 𝓓𝓮𝓬𝓵𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓭 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽
  • Iᴅᴇᴀ ᴏꜰ Sᴏᴜʟ ɪs Oᴜᴛᴄᴏᴍᴇ ᴏꜰ ᴀɴ Uᴛᴛᴇʀʟʏ Fᴏᴏʟɪsʜ Vɪᴇᴡ
    V. Nanananda

𝓐𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓽ā 𝓜𝓮𝓪𝓷𝓼 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽 𝓣𝓱𝓮𝓻𝓮 𝓘𝓼
  • Nᴏ sᴜᴄʜ ᴛʜɪɴɢ ᴀs ᴀ Sᴇʟғ, Sᴏᴜʟ, Eɢᴏ, Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ, ᴏʀ Āᴛᴍᴀɴ
    V. Buddhādasa
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by robertk »

THE ILLUSTRATOR OF ULTIMATE MEANING (PARAMATTHAJOTIKÄ) by Buddhaghosa Pali text society

,
but one whose seeing is perfected (has excellence) is
unable to do them.[/b] The incapability is mentioned here in order to
show that he does not do them even in the next existence; for in the
next existence, even if he does not know about his own noblediscipleship,
he does not, in virtue of the essential idea [of his
nature], do either these six or [190] [incur] the five risks (see A. iii,
204-6) beginning with normal killing of breathing thing
User avatar
Jgood
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2019 3:31 am

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by Jgood »

By this standard washing your hands would be a violation of the first precept.
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 6222
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by confusedlayman »

salayatananirodha wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 4:50 am you are conflating intention with motivation
the intention is to kill, the motivation is to preserve life, health, property, etc
by your logic it would be morally acceptable to kill someone because they invaded your home
because your motivation was to defend your home
but your intention is to kill, and theres the kamma
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.021x.than.html wrote:"Monks, even if bandits were to carve you up savagely, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, he among you who let his heart get angered even at that would not be doing my bidding. Even then you should train yourselves: 'Our minds will be unaffected and we will say no evil words. We will remain sympathetic, with a mind of good will, and with no inner hate. We will keep pervading these people with an awareness imbued with good will and, beginning with them, we will keep pervading the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will — abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.' That's how you should train yourselves.

killing someone in self defence is due to self view which is cause of defilements of breaking 5 precepts
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
User avatar
pitithefool
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 5:39 am

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by pitithefool »

DooDoot wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 3:52 am
I agree with this.

It might not be in the spirit of non-harm which is the core of all ethics ever, but a lot of the rules like avoiding damaging seed life or damaging live plants seem to have come from constant censure from the Jains during the Buddha's time.
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by salayatananirodha »

im not talking about plants or seeds, tho, im talking about for example worms. you can clearly see them moving with the naked eye. theyre living beings. people can be reborn as them. its bad kamma to kill them. just like they were on the sidewalk and you stepped on them on purpose, the difference is they are in your body.

i understand fear and doubt and all may take over, but, my understanding of the Dhamma, which no one has meaningfully refuted, is that the killing of these worms (or fleas or ticks or scabies or scarabs, etc) is dark kamma, and will bring pain to oneself, according to the law of kamma.
abstaining from killing yields long life and it is exclusively pleasurable.
the buddha taught the cause of things. if you recognize that an affliction like with parasites is the ripening of kamma, you can let it be and not create any more disturbances. if you can resist with non-violent means, so be it. i'm not promoting self-torture or deliberately coming into contact with beings that can kill you. anyone who says this is giving a misrepresentation. i'm frankly disappointed with the venerable's response even tho i can admire and respect him for other things he's said.

if, in the effort to preserve your own health, you would deliberately kill or maim another being, you are better off to sacrifice your health. this is because you will reverse the kammic stream in a significant way and come to experience good health and happiness. it is counterintuitive but in a lot of ways that is the Dhamma.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn03/sn03.015.than.html wrote:A man may plunder
as long as it serves his ends,
but when others are plundered,
he who has plundered
gets plundered in turn.

A fool thinks,
'Now's my chance,'
as long as his evil
has yet to ripen.
But when it ripens,
the fool
falls
into pain.

Killing, you gain
your killer.
Conquering, you gain one
who will conquer you;
insulting, insult;
harassing, harassment.

And so, through the cycle of action,
he who has plundered
gets plundered in turn.
if you kill in order to be in good health and free of suffering, you will experience exactly what you're afraid of. and it may well be because of such actions in the past that you theoretically experience a parasite infection.

and i dont think noble people are going to go the lower realms for killing, especially out of fear and clinging to the body, but they still will have to experience the consequence. same if termites took over your home, better to let your home be overrun and move out, even live on the street, than take life in pursuit of material gain. this is what i understand the buddha to have taught, if not how.
https://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?p=88171#p88171 wrote:3. Monks, I do not dispute with the world. The world disputes with me. Monks saying it properly, there is no dispute with the world on account of anything.
I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by DooDoot »

Jgood wrote: Sun Mar 28, 2021 12:14 am By this standard washing your hands would be a violation of the first precept.
yes, the doctrine of the Jains ...
Last edited by retrofuturist on Tue Mar 30, 2021 7:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Irrelevant ad-hom removed
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Bundokji
Posts: 6481
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by Bundokji »

I am not sure if the question raised by the OP is the best approach to sila as part of our training.

The eightfold path is about end-making, of which sila supports samadhi in order to develop panna. I doubt that having the right grasp on sila is to speculate about the kammic consequences of killing worms by taking medicine. Seeing the slippery slope in this approach and how it leads to proliferation was somehow answered by Ven Bramali when he gave an example about bacteria and lower forms of beings, then when should we stop.

It is the incessant quest for a defining line, sometimes to the point of obsession, that usually goes unquestioned.
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.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5603
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: challenging Ajahn Brahmali on parasites

Post by robertk »

Bundokji wrote: Tue Mar 30, 2021 9:00 am I Ven Bramali when he gave an example about bacteria and lower forms of beings, then when should we stop.
.
As bacteria are not considered as beings this is irrelevant.
Post Reply