- This topic has 6 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
-
Of course. It does not matter whether they knew it was immoral or not.
- Laws of kamma apply whether there is a Buddha in the world or not.
2 users thanked author for this post.
-
I think it also helps to understand why they find themselves in that situation in the first place:
because of kamma previously committed.
That’s why it’s so essential for people to do merits and gain a more favorable (future) environment that’s conducive towards the path.
For that reason alone we should be mindful of our interactions with others even if we are not in a position to share Dhamma. It could be because others are not open to listening or perhaps because the situation doesn’t allow (for) it.
For instance, I regularly work with young kids in everyday life. I always try and create time for them to do something meritorious, even if it’s just, let’s say, a drawing activity. For example, they recall a good deed that they’ve done and then draw it out. Then they will be reminded the whole time of that good deed. I have no control over what happens when they are at home, but I can at least encourage them to think/speak/act meritoriously while they are around me. All little things add up.
Around adults, conversations can sometimes be steered in a more favorable direction as to provoke more wholesome thinking and speech.
4 users thanked author for this post.
-
-
Yes. That is quite true.
Associating with sappurisa (moral people) is a crucial factor in being on the correct path to Nibbana.
- See “Avijjā Sutta (AN 10.61)“
In the same way, associating with asappurisa (immoral people) is a crucial factor in being on the wrong path away from Nibbana and cultivating avijjā leading to destruction.
- See “Avijjā Sutta (AN 10.61)“
-
Tribal societies generally go out for animal hunting for their livelihoods moreover ancient humans who had no other option rather than hunting (because of low knowledge), did they all commit bad kamma?
Good householder, Buddhaparisada here,
(taking here leave to replay)
Atma (“me” usual way of monks here to refer to themselves when speaking with not-gone forth, but also found in the Canon as well as a ‘Jain’, say Samana of old, traditional way.) wouldn’t reduce the matter on tribes in a general matter. The are teachings of the Sublime Buddha telling us that humans at good times are merely collector and just because of increasing greed start to organic controlled possession, farming…
Of course, right livelihood is the peak of the Sila-section, and incapacity of abstaining harmful ways doesn’t excuse wrongness, such as killing for a living.
It’s actually a main distinction between animals and humans, that a human being (merely in the sphere of mind) has the capacity of changing lifelihood. Yet there are many who are actually not able. Sure, association is a large factor, yet Upanissaya is the cause of not only food, whether, dwelling but also of people one meets. So to change a certain tribe, by seeing it’s harmfulness, isn’t easy, but just possible, requiring a lot of effort.
The matter of limited freedom to relay on right livelihood is a main reason who the Sublime Buddha gave much effort in establishment of the “para” society: Sangha, open for all willing to be taimed and trained.
(Samana Johann)
-
Yes. That is quite true.
Associating with sappurisa (moral people) is a crucial factor in being on the correct path to Nibbana.
- See “Avijjā Sutta (AN 10.61)“
In the same way, associating with asappurisa (immoral people) is a crucial factor in being on the wrong path away from Nibbana and cultivating avijjā leading to destruction.
- See “Avijjā Sutta (AN 10.61)“
Sadhu
(Samana Johann)
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.