Karma of the Shakya clan

Forum for discussion of East Asian Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Post Reply
ydnan321
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 7:14 am

Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by ydnan321 » Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:10 pm

Hello,

I have a question, especially for those who could read Chinese. According to the passage from the Ekottarāgama below, the people of the Shakyas clan in their past live were starved and had to caught and eat fish. However, such deed lead them to be reborn multiple times in hell and finally were massacred as a clan during the Buddha time? Now, is eating fish out of starvation that serious of a crime one has to suffer numerous lives in hell and finally getting such a tragic death? Then our ancestors who relied on fishing/hunting must have surely gone to hell? Is there something in the passage that I do not understand?

https://suttacentral.net/lzh/ea34.2
爾時,世尊告諸比丘:「昔日之時,此羅 閱城中有捕魚村。時世極飢儉,人食草根, 一升金貿一升米。時,彼村中有大池水,又 復饒魚。時,羅閱城中人民之類,往至池中 而捕魚食之。當於爾時,水中有二種魚:一 名拘璅,二名兩舌。是時,二魚各相謂言:『我 等於此眾人,先無過失,我是水性之虫,不 處平地,此人民之類,皆來食噉我等,設前 世時,少多有福德者,其當用報怨。』

「爾時, 村中有小兒年向八歲,亦不捕魚,復非害 命。然復彼魚在岸上者,皆悉命終;小兒見 已,極懷歡喜。

「比丘當知,汝等莫作是觀。爾 時羅閱城中人民之類,豈異人乎?今釋種是 也。爾時拘璅魚者,今流離王是也。爾時兩 舌魚者,今好苦梵志是也。爾時小兒見魚在 堓上而笑者,今我身是也。爾時,釋種坐取 魚食,由此因緣,無數劫中入地獄中,今受 此對。我爾時,坐見而笑之,今患頭痛,如似 石押,猶如以頭戴須彌山。所以然者,如 來更不受形,以捨眾行,度諸厄難,是謂, 比丘!由此因緣今受此報。諸比丘當護身、 口、意行,當念恭敬、承事梵行人。如是,諸比 丘!當作是學。」
Thanks,

YN

thomaslaw
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 am
Location: Australia

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by thomaslaw » Wed Feb 21, 2018 6:51 am

ydnan321 wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:10 pm
Hello,

I have a question, especially for those who could read Chinese. According to the passage from the Ekottarāgama below, the people of the Shakyas clan in their past live were starved and had to caught and eat fish. However, such deed lead them to be reborn multiple times in hell and finally were massacred as a clan during the Buddha time? Now, is eating fish out of starvation that serious of a crime one has to suffer numerous lives in hell and finally getting such a tragic death? Then our ancestors who relied on fishing/hunting must have surely gone to hell? Is there something in the passage that I do not understand?

https://suttacentral.net/lzh/ea34.2
爾時,世尊告諸比丘:「昔日之時,此羅 閱城中有捕魚村。時世極飢儉,人食草根, 一升金貿一升米。時,彼村中有大池水,又 復饒魚。時,羅閱城中人民之類,往至池中 而捕魚食之。當於爾時,水中有二種魚:一 名拘璅,二名兩舌。是時,二魚各相謂言:『我 等於此眾人,先無過失,我是水性之虫,不 處平地,此人民之類,皆來食噉我等,設前 世時,少多有福德者,其當用報怨。』

「爾時, 村中有小兒年向八歲,亦不捕魚,復非害 命。然復彼魚在岸上者,皆悉命終;小兒見 已,極懷歡喜。

「比丘當知,汝等莫作是觀。爾 時羅閱城中人民之類,豈異人乎?今釋種是 也。爾時拘璅魚者,今流離王是也。爾時兩 舌魚者,今好苦梵志是也。爾時小兒見魚在 堓上而笑者,今我身是也。爾時,釋種坐取 魚食,由此因緣,無數劫中入地獄中,今受 此對。我爾時,坐見而笑之,今患頭痛,如似 石押,猶如以頭戴須彌山。所以然者,如 來更不受形,以捨眾行,度諸厄難,是謂, 比丘!由此因緣今受此報。諸比丘當護身、 口、意行,當念恭敬、承事梵行人。如是,諸比 丘!當作是學。」
Thanks,

YN
You fully understand the text, I think. Does the Chinese text have a Pali version?

Thomas

ItsRaining
Posts: 225
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 7:45 am

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by ItsRaining » Wed Feb 21, 2018 6:55 am

ydnan321 wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:10 pm
Hello,

I have a question, especially for those who could read Chinese. According to the passage from the Ekottarāgama below, the people of the Shakyas clan in their past live were starved and had to caught and eat fish. However, such deed lead them to be reborn multiple times in hell and finally were massacred as a clan during the Buddha time? Now, is eating fish out of starvation that serious of a crime one has to suffer numerous lives in hell and finally getting such a tragic death? Then our ancestors who relied on fishing/hunting must have surely gone to hell? Is there something in the passage that I do not understand?

https://suttacentral.net/lzh/ea34.2
爾時,世尊告諸比丘:「昔日之時,此羅 閱城中有捕魚村。時世極飢儉,人食草根, 一升金貿一升米。時,彼村中有大池水,又 復饒魚。時,羅閱城中人民之類,往至池中 而捕魚食之。當於爾時,水中有二種魚:一 名拘璅,二名兩舌。是時,二魚各相謂言:『我 等於此眾人,先無過失,我是水性之虫,不 處平地,此人民之類,皆來食噉我等,設前 世時,少多有福德者,其當用報怨。』

「爾時, 村中有小兒年向八歲,亦不捕魚,復非害 命。然復彼魚在岸上者,皆悉命終;小兒見 已,極懷歡喜。

「比丘當知,汝等莫作是觀。爾 時羅閱城中人民之類,豈異人乎?今釋種是 也。爾時拘璅魚者,今流離王是也。爾時兩 舌魚者,今好苦梵志是也。爾時小兒見魚在 堓上而笑者,今我身是也。爾時,釋種坐取 魚食,由此因緣,無數劫中入地獄中,今受 此對。我爾時,坐見而笑之,今患頭痛,如似 石押,猶如以頭戴須彌山。所以然者,如 來更不受形,以捨眾行,度諸厄難,是謂, 比丘!由此因緣今受此報。諸比丘當護身、 口、意行,當念恭敬、承事梵行人。如是,諸比 丘!當作是學。」
Thanks,

YN
I guess that's why the Budddha discouraged killing. Does seem pretty severe though.

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1182
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by Sherab » Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:07 am

Buddha Sakyamuni was undeniably an atheist. He stated clearly that there is no Creator God. That being the case, Buddhist ontology must be founded on natural laws. There are no two ways about it. From a buddhist viewpoint, the law of karma is therefore a natural law akin to a conservation law in science such as the conservation of information.

Therefore it should not be surprising that the Buddha taught that one should not engage in the killing of any sentient beings. If you do intend to kill any sentient being, you will have to face the consequences, whether immediate, in the future or in a future life.

As to the eating of fish out of starvation, the state of starvation that one finds oneself in would be a ripening of one's past karma. By resorting to killing fish in order to fend off one's starvation is to create new karma for oneself that will ripen in future. (Of course, if the fish died naturally, then there is no negative karma associated with eating that fish.) This is a decision that one has to make, and what that decision will be depend on how much one has internalized the Dharma.

MatthewAngby
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:51 am

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by MatthewAngby » Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:55 pm

Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:07 am
Buddha Sakyamuni was undeniably an atheist. He stated clearly that there is no Creator God. That being the case, Buddhist ontology must be founded on natural laws. There are no two ways about it. From a buddhist viewpoint, the law of karma is therefore a natural law akin to a conservation law in science such as the conservation of information.

Therefore it should not be surprising that the Buddha taught that one should not engage in the killing of any sentient beings. If you do intend to kill any sentient being, you will have to face the consequences, whether immediate, in the future or in a future life.

As to the eating of fish out of starvation, the state of starvation that one finds oneself in would be a ripening of one's past karma. By resorting to killing fish in order to fend off one's starvation is to create new karma for oneself that will ripen in future. (Of course, if the fish died naturally, then there is no negative karma associated with eating that fish.) This is a decision that one has to make, and what that decision will be depend on how much one has internalized the Dharma.
Hmm... yes yes. I have a really huge question on killing too. Suppose you know someone who is going to kill a group of 50 men, but you refuse to kill him that person because you are scared you will gain bad karma. But if you kill him, you save the 50 men. So like who gains the bigger “bad” karma in this situation.

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 17129
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by Grigoris » Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:10 pm

MatthewAngby wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:55 pm
Hmm... yes yes. I have a really huge question on killing too. Suppose you know someone who is going to kill a group of 50 men, but you refuse to kill him that person because you are scared you will gain bad karma. But if you kill him, you save the 50 men. So like who gains the bigger “bad” karma in this situation.
What does it matter? It's not a competition. It's not like anybody is going to win an award or something. How do you know if the 50 people have a karmic debt to the would-be killer or not? Work on becoming a Buddha or high level Bodhisattva (ie capable of seeing all the causes and conditions and outcomes in a situation) and then you will be able to answer these sort of questions for yourself.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1182
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by Sherab » Wed Feb 21, 2018 11:45 pm

MatthewAngby wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:55 pm
.. Suppose you know someone who is going to kill a group of 50 men, but you refuse to kill him that person because you are scared you will gain bad karma. But if you kill him, you save the 50 men. So like who gains the bigger “bad” karma in this situation.
If you weigh the gains and losses when placed in such a situation, you are still mired in the eight worldly concerns. If the situation is one in which you don't have the luxury of time to think, you will just react according to your nature, which will in turn depends on how much you have internalized the Dharma. Whatever your decision, the natural law of karma will still operate. So it is better as Grigoris said, "work on becoming a Buddha or a high level bodhisattva".

PeterC
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by PeterC » Sun Feb 25, 2018 7:40 am

MatthewAngby wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:55 pm

Hmm... yes yes. I have a really huge question on killing too. Suppose you know someone who is going to kill a group of 50 men, but you refuse to kill him that person because you are scared you will gain bad karma. But if you kill him, you save the 50 men. So like who gains the bigger “bad” karma in this situation.
Look for the sutra that discusses that hypothetical. But it’s very, very important to remember that that story was about a bodhisattva who could perceive perfectly the karmic effects of both action and inaction in that situation. A non-Arya being has no business trying to make this sort of judgement. And that’s where Greg’s comment is important. This sort of speculation doesn’t help a practitioner in any way.

User avatar
Brunelleschi
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 4:09 pm

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by Brunelleschi » Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:18 am

Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:07 am
Buddha Sakyamuni was undeniably an atheist. He stated clearly that there is no Creator God. That being the case, Buddhist ontology must be founded on natural laws. There are no two ways about it. From a buddhist viewpoint, the law of karma is therefore a natural law akin to a conservation law in science such as the conservation of information.

Therefore it should not be surprising that the Buddha taught that one should not engage in the killing of any sentient beings. If you do intend to kill any sentient being, you will have to face the consequences, whether immediate, in the future or in a future life.

As to the eating of fish out of starvation, the state of starvation that one finds oneself in would be a ripening of one's past karma. By resorting to killing fish in order to fend off one's starvation is to create new karma for oneself that will ripen in future. (Of course, if the fish died naturally, then there is no negative karma associated with eating that fish.) This is a decision that one has to make, and what that decision will be depend on how much one has internalized the Dharma.
:good:

Following this thread.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27770
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by Malcolm » Sun Feb 25, 2018 2:21 pm

MatthewAngby wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:55 pm
Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:07 am
Buddha Sakyamuni was undeniably an atheist. He stated clearly that there is no Creator God. That being the case, Buddhist ontology must be founded on natural laws. There are no two ways about it. From a buddhist viewpoint, the law of karma is therefore a natural law akin to a conservation law in science such as the conservation of information.

Therefore it should not be surprising that the Buddha taught that one should not engage in the killing of any sentient beings. If you do intend to kill any sentient being, you will have to face the consequences, whether immediate, in the future or in a future life.

As to the eating of fish out of starvation, the state of starvation that one finds oneself in would be a ripening of one's past karma. By resorting to killing fish in order to fend off one's starvation is to create new karma for oneself that will ripen in future. (Of course, if the fish died naturally, then there is no negative karma associated with eating that fish.) This is a decision that one has to make, and what that decision will be depend on how much one has internalized the Dharma.
Hmm... yes yes. I have a really huge question on killing too. Suppose you know someone who is going to kill a group of 50 men, but you refuse to kill him that person because you are scared you will gain bad karma. But if you kill him, you save the 50 men. So like who gains the bigger “bad” karma in this situation.

Mahāyāna ethics in general would hold that you should kill the man intent on killing the other fifty.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27770
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by Malcolm » Sun Feb 25, 2018 2:22 pm

PeterC wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 7:40 am
MatthewAngby wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:55 pm

Hmm... yes yes. I have a really huge question on killing too. Suppose you know someone who is going to kill a group of 50 men, but you refuse to kill him that person because you are scared you will gain bad karma. But if you kill him, you save the 50 men. So like who gains the bigger “bad” karma in this situation.
Look for the sutra that discusses that hypothetical. But it’s very, very important to remember that that story was about a bodhisattva who could perceive perfectly the karmic effects of both action and inaction in that situation. A non-Arya being has no business trying to make this sort of judgement. And that’s where Greg’s comment is important. This sort of speculation doesn’t help a practitioner in any way.

A non-ārya, a pṛthagjana, absolutely has business making these sorts of judgements. If not, then you are basically arguing Mahāyāna ethics are only for āryas, and that is patently false.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

PeterC
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by PeterC » Sun Feb 25, 2018 3:21 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 2:22 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 7:40 am
MatthewAngby wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:55 pm

Hmm... yes yes. I have a really huge question on killing too. Suppose you know someone who is going to kill a group of 50 men, but you refuse to kill him that person because you are scared you will gain bad karma. But if you kill him, you save the 50 men. So like who gains the bigger “bad” karma in this situation.
Look for the sutra that discusses that hypothetical. But it’s very, very important to remember that that story was about a bodhisattva who could perceive perfectly the karmic effects of both action and inaction in that situation. A non-Arya being has no business trying to make this sort of judgement. And that’s where Greg’s comment is important. This sort of speculation doesn’t help a practitioner in any way.
A non-ārya, a pṛthagjana, absolutely has business making these sorts of judgements. If not, then you are basically arguing Mahāyāna ethics are only for āryas, and that is patently false.
I meant judgement in the sense of deciding on that course of action. Of course a non-omniscient non-arya would still have to decide whether to act or not to act. If they genuinely believed that the man was about to commit mass murder, then that takes you back to the OP’s hypothetical.

I thought the point of the story was that the arya, perceiving that the man was about to commit murder and thereby condemn himself to a long period of suffering, pre-emptively kills the man and takes upon himself the negative karma thereof but by so doing prevents the man from suffering a worse fate. An non-arya would have lacked the ability to perceive the mans future actions and their consequences correctly and would therefore be unable to do the required karmic calculus. It was for that reason that I said that a non-arya has no business making that choice.

Simon E.
Posts: 5521
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by Simon E. » Sun Feb 25, 2018 3:37 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 2:21 pm
MatthewAngby wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:55 pm
Sherab wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 8:07 am
Buddha Sakyamuni was undeniably an atheist. He stated clearly that there is no Creator God. That being the case, Buddhist ontology must be founded on natural laws. There are no two ways about it. From a buddhist viewpoint, the law of karma is therefore a natural law akin to a conservation law in science such as the conservation of information.

Therefore it should not be surprising that the Buddha taught that one should not engage in the killing of any sentient beings. If you do intend to kill any sentient being, you will have to face the consequences, whether immediate, in the future or in a future life.

As to the eating of fish out of starvation, the state of starvation that one finds oneself in would be a ripening of one's past karma. By resorting to killing fish in order to fend off one's starvation is to create new karma for oneself that will ripen in future. (Of course, if the fish died naturally, then there is no negative karma associated with eating that fish.) This is a decision that one has to make, and what that decision will be depend on how much one has internalized the Dharma.
Hmm... yes yes. I have a really huge question on killing too. Suppose you know someone who is going to kill a group of 50 men, but you refuse to kill him that person because you are scared you will gain bad karma. But if you kill him, you save the 50 men. So like who gains the bigger “bad” karma in this situation.

Mahāyāna ethics in general would hold that you should kill the man intent on killing the other fifty.
This question comes up on a regular basis in public teachings.
The last time I heard it addressed was by Situ Rinpoche. The question specifically concerned knowing that a man in a hotel had an atomic bomb which he intended to detonate as an act of terrorism.
Situ R. said that one was honour bound to do the dharmic thing and stop him..if that necessitated killing him then that would have to be done.
He said that failure by any given individual to do all they could to stop the enormous suffering that would result from the detonation amounted to an act of great non virtue.
If you use the word 'mind' without defining your terms I will ask you politely for a definition. :smile:
This is not to be awkward. But it's really not self-explanatory.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27770
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by Malcolm » Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:12 pm

PeterC wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 3:21 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 2:22 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 7:40 am


Look for the sutra that discusses that hypothetical. But it’s very, very important to remember that that story was about a bodhisattva who could perceive perfectly the karmic effects of both action and inaction in that situation. A non-Arya being has no business trying to make this sort of judgement. And that’s where Greg’s comment is important. This sort of speculation doesn’t help a practitioner in any way.
A non-ārya, a pṛthagjana, absolutely has business making these sorts of judgements. If not, then you are basically arguing Mahāyāna ethics are only for āryas, and that is patently false.
I meant judgement in the sense of deciding on that course of action. Of course a non-omniscient non-arya would still have to decide whether to act or not to act. If they genuinely believed that the man was about to commit mass murder, then that takes you back to the OP’s hypothetical.

I thought the point of the story was that the arya, perceiving that the man was about to commit murder and thereby condemn himself to a long period of suffering, pre-emptively kills the man and takes upon himself the negative karma thereof but by so doing prevents the man from suffering a worse fate. An non-arya would have lacked the ability to perceive the mans future actions and their consequences correctly and would therefore be unable to do the required karmic calculus. It was for that reason that I said that a non-arya has no business making that choice.
You don't need to do any karmic calculation.People are being threatened? You stop the person threatening them. No one trying to kill 50 people is up to any good.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

PeterC
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by PeterC » Sun Feb 25, 2018 11:39 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 5:12 pm
PeterC wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 3:21 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 2:22 pm


A non-ārya, a pṛthagjana, absolutely has business making these sorts of judgements. If not, then you are basically arguing Mahāyāna ethics are only for āryas, and that is patently false.
I meant judgement in the sense of deciding on that course of action. Of course a non-omniscient non-arya would still have to decide whether to act or not to act. If they genuinely believed that the man was about to commit mass murder, then that takes you back to the OP’s hypothetical.

I thought the point of the story was that the arya, perceiving that the man was about to commit murder and thereby condemn himself to a long period of suffering, pre-emptively kills the man and takes upon himself the negative karma thereof but by so doing prevents the man from suffering a worse fate. An non-arya would have lacked the ability to perceive the mans future actions and their consequences correctly and would therefore be unable to do the required karmic calculus. It was for that reason that I said that a non-arya has no business making that choice.
You don't need to do any karmic calculation.People are being threatened? You stop the person threatening them. No one trying to kill 50 people is up to any good.
That’s a short, slippery slope toward “I saw the suspect’s hand move toward his waistband...”

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1182
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by Sherab » Sun Feb 25, 2018 11:42 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Feb 25, 2018 2:21 pm
MatthewAngby wrote:
Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:55 pm
Hmm... yes yes. I have a really huge question on killing too. Suppose you know someone who is going to kill a group of 50 men, but you refuse to kill him that person because you are scared you will gain bad karma. But if you kill him, you save the 50 men. So like who gains the bigger “bad” karma in this situation.
Mahāyāna ethics in general would hold that you should kill the man intent on killing the other fifty.
Indeed. But I hesitated to put it so barely because

(1) the probability of an ordinary person (who has the merit to meet and practice the Dharma) finding oneself in such a situation is low (in my opinion);
(2) how certain you are of the accuracy of your information will impact on your decision;
(3) whether your killing of the person will save or accelerate the demise of the intended victims will depend on the situation and your awareness of the situation;
(4) and most importantly, one must be prepared to accept the consequences of one's decision if it turned out to be the wrong one.

Therefore, it is better in my opinion, to concentrate on internalizing the Dharma so the one's chances of making the right choice in a timely manner is greater, should one ever find oneself in such a situation.

It is even better if you can reach the stage of an arya being as you can have a much clearer picture of the situation and your response will be much more automatic.

PeterC
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: Karma of the Shakya clan

Post by PeterC » Mon Feb 26, 2018 2:46 am

To stop an icchantika with a sword, you need a bodhisattva with a bigger sword...

Post Reply

Return to “East Asian Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests