Page 1 of 2

does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 10:51 pm
by marc108
would releasing ladybugs into my garden to eat aphids violate the 1st precept?

thanks :smile:

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 11:52 pm
by Ben
Hi Marc,

Ethically, its no different to spraying your garden with pesticide.
kind regards,

Ben

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 12:11 am
by LonesomeYogurt
It depends on your intention, as all kamma does. If you release them intending for aphids to die, then it is a breach of the first precept, yes.

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 3:29 am
by plwk
You could train them to eat mindfully....

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 5:42 am
by Cittasanto
marc108 wrote:would releasing ladybugs into my garden to eat aphids violate the 1st precept?

thanks :smile:
like Ben said,although I would add, the benefit is that this method has a possibility of the aphids getting away to pastures new

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 6:14 am
by tiltbillings
marc108 wrote:would releasing ladybugs into my garden to eat aphids violate the 1st precept?

thanks :smile:
"Aphids are among the most destructive insect pests on cultivated plants in temperate regions."

It is always a balancing act. I'd have no compunctions about the ladybugs, and it beats the begeesus out using poisons.

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 6:53 am
by Mr Man
It's your decision.

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2012 2:33 pm
by SDC
plwk wrote:You could train them to eat mindfully....
:tongue: Nice!

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 1:50 am
by Sumangalo
I'm glad you brought up the subject of gardening and pests. I struggle so much with the first precept and gardening. It seems as though it is okay to pass the burden of killing on to others by buying our produce at the grocery store, and meat for that matter, but it's not okay to destroy pests in order to feed ourselves and our families in our own gardens.

This bothers me. We greatly benefit from the killing others do for us Buddhists.

Forgive me for having my doubts about such a fundamental Buddhist teaching, perhaps I'm a "bad" Buddhist. I see the killing of insects to provide food for the world to be a great good.

Thank you for hearing me.

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 2:25 am
by Hanzze
tiltbillings wrote:It is always a balancing act.
Can you explain more of the balanced intention of aversion or its physical act of killing? Hiri is very dangerous.

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 2:30 am
by Hanzze
Sumangalo wrote:I'm glad you brought up the subject of gardening and pests. I struggle so much with the first precept and gardening. It seems as though it is okay to pass the burden of killing on to others by buying our produce at the grocery store, and meat for that matter, but it's not okay to destroy pests in order to feed ourselves and our families in our own gardens.

This bothers me. We greatly benefit from the killing others do for us Buddhists.

Forgive me for having my doubts about such a fundamental Buddhist teaching, perhaps I'm a "bad" Buddhist. I see the killing of insects to provide food for the world to be a great good.

Thank you for hearing me.
Nobody tells you to do so. If you see that it is harmful for you and/or for others just stop. If you have no idea because you thinks that you need to do this or that, ask somebody who had mastered this situation.

There is no such thing as a "bad" Buddhist, there is just not understanding or not seeing a good way out. And one more thing focus on your self, and do not care to much about Buddhists. There are some who do well and some who do not that well but no need to identify your self with Buddhists, just stay on the well side and what the Buddha taught.

There should have been people who gave up real wealth, kingdoms and anything esle as they realiced some things on this earth and start to follow the Dhamma and we are not able to let go of some plants and even give killing in this regard a thought...

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:13 pm
by Sumangalo
There should have been people who gave up real wealth, kingdoms and anything esle as they realiced some things on this earth and start to follow the Dhamma and we are not able to let go of some plants and even give killing in this regard a thought...

Thank you for taking the time to reply Hanzze. I guess that my problem is that I don't think that it's noble to pass necessary, unpleasant tasks down to others, I feel there is nobility in taking on these tasks yourself, though with a heavy heart. While it might be nice if permaculture or other agricultural techniques that rely on nature to take care of pests naturally, we're not there yet, and most likely never will be. Since the introduction of agriculture, man has been destroying pests in order to feed himself.

I respect the Native American philosophy that realizes that taking life is necessary but they pay great respect to animals they kill.

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:52 pm
by santa100
Could try plants that are natural repellents..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphids#Control" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 12:56 am
by Hanzze
Sumangalo wrote:
There should have been people who gave up real wealth, kingdoms and anything esle as they realiced some things on this earth and start to follow the Dhamma and we are not able to let go of some plants and even give killing in this regard a thought...

Thank you for taking the time to reply Hanzze. I guess that my problem is that I don't think that it's noble to pass necessary, unpleasant tasks down to others, I feel there is nobility in taking on these tasks yourself, though with a heavy heart. While it might be nice if permaculture or other agricultural techniques that rely on nature to take care of pests naturally, we're not there yet, and most likely never will be. Since the introduction of agriculture, man has been destroying pests in order to feed himself.

I respect the Native American philosophy that realizes that taking life is necessary but they pay great respect to animals they kill.
Yes Sumangalo, that is really often a nice thought (reality is sometimes different to romantic stories), but actually you are just responsible for your own actions and intentions and one has plenty enought to do to take care of them. To think in sphears of we, is not only very unsecure for one self, but also for all others. It's very importand to let go of ideas of we to help the whole groupe. Obsering precepts menas to look on ones own actions and more intentions and is less about philosopies and silly sacrifies for anything. Its hard enought to get one self a little under control, but that how ever has allways 100% impact of all beings. And you can really focus on where you are and work effective for your own and the wellfar of all others.
Five faultless gifts

"There are these five gifts, five great gifts — original, long-standing, traditional, ancient, unadulterated, unadulterated from the beginning — that are not open to suspicion, will never be open to suspicion, and are unfaulted by knowledgeable contemplatives & brahmans. Which five?

"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...

"Furthermore, abandoning taking what is not given (stealing), the disciple of the noble ones abstains from taking what is not given. 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 second gift...

"Furthermore, abandoning illicit sex, the disciple of the noble ones abstains from illicit sex. 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 third gift...

"Furthermore, abandoning lying, the disciple of the noble ones abstains from lying. 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 fourth gift...

"Furthermore, abandoning the use of intoxicants, the disciple of the noble ones abstains from taking intoxicants. 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 fifth gift, the fifth 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. And this is the eighth reward of merit, reward of skillfulness, nourishment of happiness, celestial, resulting in happiness, leading to heaven, leading to what is desirable, pleasurable, & appealing; to welfare & to happiness."

— AN 8.39
There is also a good short essay, I would like to share: Getting the message

Re: does this violate the 1st precept?

Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:45 am
by Sumangalo
I'll certainly check out the essay, I listen to Than Geoff every day. Thanks again for responding.
"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
The thing is that it really doesn't give freedom from oppression one bit. We just hire others to do our killing with our buying decisions. Perhaps I will not call myself Buddhist because I just can't get past this. I've listened to the Ajahns talk on the first precept and they don't allow any wiggle room yet they themselves have others kill for them and benefit from it.

Looks like farming and raising livestock is wrong livelihood but passing the buck is okay. I don't see how the Buddha could condone such a thing.