Reply To: Pāpa Kamma Versus Akusala Kamma


Yes I have read #14 and the links included there. I understand that the exact detailed working of kamma cannot be quantified or determined by anyone other than a Buddha, but we can get a general idea about the workings of kamma.

So I’ll use an extreme example:
1) X actually kills Y.
2) X helps someone kill Y.
3) X orders/instructs someone else to kill Y.
4) X here did not even lay a finger on Y, but is mentally glad about the killing of Y.

From the above, to me it would be clear that X would get worse kamma from doing #1 than doing #4.

This is of course assuming 2 things:
a) the target sentient being is the same in all 4 actions(in this example, the target sentient being is Y in each of the 4 actions).
b) the strength of intention of X in all 4 actions are also the same or at least similar(example: the dosa cetasika is strong in X’s mind in all 4 actions.)

If the target sentient being(Y) is the same in all 4 actions, X is doing the following
1) kaya kamma(miccha kammantha)
2) kaya kamma(miccha kammantha)
3) vaci kamma(miccha vaca)
4) vaci kamma(miccha sankappa)

As I read before, kaya kamma has more kammic weight than vaci kamma in general. In general kammantha would be more than vaca, and vaca would be more than sankappa.

In terms of anantariya kamma, #1 is the only action that will be considered the anatariya papa kamma. Whereas #2/3/4(even though these are also highly immoral)will not be anatariya papa kamma.

Same thing for good deeds. If X gave food to the Buddha, that would yield higher kammic weight than if X encouraged/instructed someone else to give food to the Buddha. This is again, assuming the alobha/adosa/karuna cetasika in X’s mind are all very strong(same/similar) in both of those actions.

So that is why I think the order that those 4 actions are listed to be a general indicator of kammic weight.