First precept

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: First precept

Post by cappuccino »

Joe.c wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:33 am Lol. I'm done with a fool.

Keep holding on your wrong view, you will go lower realm for sure.
Things are not as they seem
Joe.c
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: First precept

Post by Joe.c »

thepea wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:27 am I’m not sure how a puthujjana has passed through the stages of insight?
Why don’t you explain this.
Jeez ... why people emphasized on insight when precepts hasn't been fully understood. This should be the first insight for stream enterer.

I'm very sure you might have delusional insights if precepts hasn't been understood.

Do you think by meditate one can get into sotapanna? Please quote a sutta where a person become sotapanna due to meditation only.
May you be relax, happy, comfortable and free of dukkhas from hearing true dhamma.
May you gain unshakable confidence in Buddha, Dhamma and (Ariya) Sangha.
Learn about Buddha/Dhamma Characters.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: First precept

Post by cappuccino »

Joe.c wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:38 am Do you think by meditate one can get into sotapanna?
You merely have to understand dependent arising


I say merely but it’s asking a lot
Last edited by cappuccino on Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Joe.c
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: First precept

Post by Joe.c »

cappuccino wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:35 am Things are not as they seem
Nope. Things are as clear as can be.

One who has wrong view only land in lower realm such as ghosts, animal and hells.
May you be relax, happy, comfortable and free of dukkhas from hearing true dhamma.
May you gain unshakable confidence in Buddha, Dhamma and (Ariya) Sangha.
Learn about Buddha/Dhamma Characters.
Joe.c
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: First precept

Post by Joe.c »

cappuccino wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:40 am You merely have to understand dependent arising
I say merely but it’s asking a lot
Lol. Delusional indeed.
May you be relax, happy, comfortable and free of dukkhas from hearing true dhamma.
May you gain unshakable confidence in Buddha, Dhamma and (Ariya) Sangha.
Learn about Buddha/Dhamma Characters.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: First precept

Post by cappuccino »

Joe.c wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:40 am Nope. Things are as clear as can be.
Things seem as clear as can be
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: First precept

Post by thepea »

Joe.c wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:38 am
thepea wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:27 am I’m not sure how a puthujjana has passed through the stages of insight?
Why don’t you explain this.
Jeez ... why people emphasized on insight when precepts hasn't been fully understood. This should be the first insight for stream enterer.

I'm very sure you might have delusional insights if precepts hasn't been understood.

Do you think by meditate one can get into sotapanna? Please quote a sutta where a person become sotapanna due to meditation only.
A stream enterer has passed through the stages of insight.
Precepts are merely for developing samadhi.
You don’t “get into” sotapanna, you pass through these wisdoms when ripe to do so. These wisdoms prevent one(through liberation) from carrying fear in the mind capable of generating thought formations of the lower planes. The thought I will catch a fish to feed my family is not of the lower planes.
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: First precept

Post by thepea »

bpallister wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:15 am i almost killed an ant yesterday trying to get him off me.
You have the freedom to defend yourself from harm or trespass.
Now was it the sensation of the ant climbing on you that provoked fear or was it a fire ant that can cause unpleasantness. If you were aware of the situation and chose to calmly remove the ant and it’s killed accidentally then this is not destructive. If there was no danger and one loses the balance of mind and blindly lashes and kills then this is destructive killing.
If there was danger and one consciously smacks the ant then this is self defence and not destructive.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: First precept

Post by Sam Vara »

thepea wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:48 am
Sam Vara wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 9:07 pm
thepea wrote: Thu Jul 28, 2022 8:43 pm

It’s testable by all of us, it’s certainly not private, what evidence do you need? War vets suffering from their heinous crimes or countless householders providing food for their communities and enjoying a good life?
What evidence have you got? Lots of vets don't suffer at all. And lots of of people who have no war experience suffering greatly.
The textual support is in the translation, it’s destruction not killing. The entirety of the suttas are language corrupted.
Ah, you're back to this one. You played this card in another thread. If you believe it, it means that pāṇātipātā is not what the Buddha said - it must be a later corrupt addition by some monk or transcriber. And someone has translated this Pali term into a range of meanings, to try to convey what it means. "Killing, killing living beings, killing breathing creatures, destroying breathing creatures, destroying life, etc, etc...". And you are then deciding that it means those English terms that you favour - those which don't use the word "kill", but use another term which has a wider range of meanings in the English, like "destruction".

That's merely your own moral code or system of ethics that you are using there. It cannot have anything to do with what the Buddha said, because you have no cogent reason to select one translation rather than another; and because corrupted texts mean that you can't ever know what the Buddha actually meant. That's fine. You have your own moral code, which you have rehearsed here so often that I probably know it almost as well as you do. It's your own private morality, or one cobbled together from other ethical systems you have read about. There's nothing wrong with that, and I wish you well with it. You have said you are not a Buddhist. But presenting it here on a Theravadan Buddhist forum, and occasionally relating it to Buddhist ideas, means that you will be perpetually talking at cross-purposes with people who think you have misunderstood the teachings. Whereas in fact, you have a different teaching.

Do you think it's time to give it a rest now? Are there any new ideas that you want to raise about the first precept, or does the thread need locking? As you don't have a Buddhist morality, I could put in in "connections to other paths"...
Correct.... I’m not Buddhist, but neither was/is Buddha.
This is what Mr. Goenka taught and what I’ve mentioned countless times here. I really don’t comprehend why you find it so difficult for one to practice the dhamma without being or labelling oneself as Buddhist. This seems to be a defence mechanism used here to devalue another member or to cast them aside.
I don't have any problem with how you practice anything, thepea. But this is a forum for the discussion of the Dhamma of Theravadan Buddhism. If anyone has their own idiosyncratic beliefs which are at odds with Theravadan Buddhism but which are expressed using Theravadan terms incorrectly, that has the potential for causing pointless misunderstandings and conflict. If they post obsessively and with an apparent lack of good faith, then excisions and removal of posts and suspensions will be the result.
bpallister
Posts: 662
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2021 2:13 am

Re: First precept

Post by bpallister »

thepea wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 4:17 am
bpallister wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:15 am i almost killed an ant yesterday trying to get him off me.
You have the freedom to defend yourself from harm or trespass.
Now was it the sensation of the ant climbing on you that provoked fear or was it a fire ant that can cause unpleasantness. If you were aware of the situation and chose to calmly remove the ant and it’s killed accidentally then this is not destructive. If there was no danger and one loses the balance of mind and blindly lashes and kills then this is destructive killing.
If there was danger and one consciously smacks the ant then this is self defence and not destructive.
he was climbing up my leg and i kinda shook him off but almost stepped on him. i was aware of the situation
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: First precept

Post by cappuccino »

thepea wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:50 am The thought I will catch a fish to feed my family is not of the lower planes.
Even though it’s normal… this does not mean there is no Karma


The truth is inconvenient!
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: First precept

Post by thepea »

cappuccino wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:31 pm
thepea wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 2:50 am The thought I will catch a fish to feed my family is not of the lower planes.
Even though it’s normal… this does not mean there is no Karma


The truth is inconvenient!
Every action(verb/thought) has kamma.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: First precept

Post by cappuccino »

thepea wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 3:03 pm Every action has kamma.
Every intention
thepea
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: First precept

Post by thepea »

cappuccino wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 3:28 pm
thepea wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 3:03 pm Every action has kamma.
Every intention
Intention is action(thought or verb).
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: First precept

Post by cappuccino »

thepea wrote: Fri Aug 12, 2022 5:25 pm Intention is action.
Suppose I intend to help someone and harm them instead


Karma is uncertain but I did not intend to harm
Post Reply