Also, note the temporal relationship:
"Cetana is kamma," and compare this to, "kamma is cetana."
Keep in mind the general audience who was taught by the Buddha, at the time... I think their general belief was that their status quo was already determined by the previous kamma, and that this was inescapable. He turned this right-side up.
Are killing trees bad Kamma?
-
- Posts: 939
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm
Re: Are killing trees bad Kamma?
Last edited by beeblebrox on Thu Apr 03, 2014 12:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
- lyndon taylor
- Posts: 1835
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
- Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
- Contact:
Re: Are killing trees bad Kamma?
Bhikkhu Bodhi in that previous link uses the word volition instead of intention, aren't we talking about the same pali word in that context??
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha057.htm
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha057.htm
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John
http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27860
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Are killing trees bad Kamma?
Greetings Lyndon,
Metta,
Retro.
He seems to be referring to cetana.lyndon taylor wrote:Bhikkhu Bodhi in that previous link uses the word volition instead of intention, aren't we talking about the same pali word in that context??
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha057.htm
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Are killing trees bad Kamma?
There is a difference between animal life and plant life.SarathW wrote:Are killing trees bad Kamma?
I just wonder whether killing a tree or picking a fruit from a tree is unwholesome Kamma.
I think above actions are carried out with attachment or aversion.
Eating food with attachment could be a bad kamma too.
I know Vinaya prohibit monks killing trees or picking fruit from a tree.
This rule does not apply to lay people but it may be a rebirth making activity.
if I pick a fruit from a tree and offer to someone it may be a wholesome Kamma.
I like to know your opinion.
If you agree, what is the most practical way to overcome this. (We need trees and food to make a living)
This question came to me after seen the following post.
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 37#p284589
Abstaining from killing animals is included in the first precept: abstaining from killing.
If you feel drawn to abstaining from killing plant life you may like to consider undertaking a monastic way of life where it is possible to abstain from killing plant life(more extensive Sila as referred to in Long Discourses of the Buddha, Section on Morality) and still receive food.
If you are a lay person who needs trees and plants you can get these things while still observing the precepts. You may like to be careful about your usage of these things so that they are not wasted.
Re: Are killing trees bad Kamma?
SarathW, plants are nature's creation that have only Rupa and No Nama from the very beginning. Therefore, in Buddhist, plants are not "alive."SarathW wrote:Are killing trees bad Kamma?
I just wonder whether killing a tree or picking a fruit from a tree is unwholesome Kamma.
I think above actions are carried out with attachment or aversion.
Eating food with attachment could be a bad kamma too.