Skip to main content

Does this qualify for muditā brahmavihāra, even though it involves lying, deception, bribery?

 

3min. video, 105 yr. old man receiving honor and award

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxuRarH5nPU&list=WL&index=37



Forum discussion



Re: Does this qualify for muditā brahmavihāra, even though it involves, lying, deception, blackmail?

Post by frank k » Mon Dec 26, 2022 4:55 am
Here's a thought.
Someone asks you, "how are you?"

The truth is, most of us feel some mixture of good, bad, moody, indifference, whatever, but we just want to give a short answer to move the conversation along.

So if we say, "I feel good". That's partially true. Partially a lie.
if we say, "I feel lousy." That's partially true. Partially a lie.

Is that wrong speech?
Not a black and white clear cut choice on here whether that's a lie right?

Now if a nazi knocks on your door asking if you're hiding jewish children,
maybe the truth is, you're not 'hiding jewish children',
you're 'transporting them to their final destination, away from you murderous nazi bastards, and they're just temporarily stopping by my house.',
and the shortest answer to move the conversation along is, "no."

would that be a lie?


Now as for lying and bribing officials in other countries to convince them to allow those jewish children to emigrate there, I can't think of a kusala Dharma grey area at the moment.







Comments

  1. Interestingly, there is monk from Myanmar who wrote a book entitled, “How Are You?”, which is based upon the fact that this question is not without its shortcomings.

    An English translation of the book, as well as an audio book version can be found here:
    https://archive.org/details/@528_publications

    Here are a couple excerpts:

    Actually, it’s not really suitable to ask the question, “How are you?” The human life is not one that is characterized by being in great conditions. We weren’t born as humans to be in a state of perfect well-being. Our lives began with crying from the moment of birth. We start out in an unfavorable position because the body can’t be free from dukkha, and the ordinary person can’t be free from the kilesā. Starting from birth, misery, worry, and stress are part of the whole life, so this matter of being human is not so well at all.
    People readily get old, fall ill, and die. As we grow old and become sick, the signs of aging and illness become obvious in our appearances. They can’t be hidden or kept secret. We shouldn’t pretend otherwise. It’s blatantly obvious. When we become old and sick, our lives aren’t so great. Getting around is difficult. We aren’t able to undertake the things that we used to. Eating and digestion become problematic. Nothing is optimal. However, when we consider aging and illness, we don’t have to become depressed or demoralized. It’s showing us clearly what it is to be human. It’s the thrust of Dhamma. The body’s nature of anicca, dukkha, and anattā is being directly displayed.

    […]

    When we see one another, we should ask, “Is it useful?” “You can still use your body, right?” Because with a human life, it’s especially important to use our bodies productively so that we can gain kusala before it’s too late. This is the question worth asking. That’s why when I see someone, it’s become a habit for me to ask, “Is the body still available to use?” People who are not accustomed to being asked this type of question become dumbfounded when I ask them this. After explaining it, they laugh with understanding and reply accordingly, “It‘s still useful, venerable sir.”
    When people see me and ask how I’m doing, I will answer, “I can still use it.” When my answer doesn’t seem to correspond to their question, they think I’m hard of hearing and repeat the question more loudly, asking “How are you?” two or three more times. I repeat, "It is still useful, I can still ask it to do things for me," and then I have to explain what I mean so they can understand.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This simplistic blog answers the later question about Dhp 137. When the mind is dominated by Biblical ideology, what happened in the translations of Dhp 137 also happened in this blog.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Advice to younger meditators on jhāna, sex, porn, masturbation

Someone asked: Is porn considered harmful sexual.activity? I don't have a sex life because I don't have a partner and I don't wish to engage in casual sex so I use porn to quench the biological urge to orgasm. I can't see that's it's harmful because nobody is being forced into it. The actors are all paid well and claim to enjoy it etc. The only harm I can see is that it's so accessible these days on smart devices and so children may access it but I believe that this is the parents responsibility to not allow unsupervised use of devices etc. Views? Frankk response: In another thread, you asked about pleasant sensations and jhāna.  I'm guessing you're young, so here's some important advice you won't get from suttas   if you're serious about jhāna.  (since monastics are already celibate by rule)   If you want to attain stable and higher jhānas,   celibacy and noble silence to the best of your ability are the feedstock and prerequiste to tha

SN 48.40 Ven. Thanissaro comments on Ven. Sunyo's analysis

This was Ven. Sunyo's analysis of SN 48.40: https://notesonthedhamma.blogspot.com/2024/05/exciting-news-honest-ebt-scholars-like.html And here is Ven. Thanissaro's response to that analysis: I think there’s a better way to tackle the issue of SN 48:40 than by appealing to the oldest layers of commentarial literature. That way is to point out that SN 48:40, as we have it, doesn’t pass the test in DN 16 for determining what’s genuine Dhamma and what’s not. There the standard is, not the authority of the person who’s claiming to report the Buddha’s teachings, but whether the teachings he’s reporting are actually in accordance with the principles of the Dhamma that you know. So the simple fact that those who have passed the Buddha’s teachings down to us say that a particular passage is what the Buddha actually taught is not sufficient grounds for accepting it. In the case of the jhānas—the point at issue here— we have to take as our guide the standard formula for the jhānas, a

1min. video: Dalai Lama kissing boy and asking him to suck his tongue

To give more context, this is a public event,  * everyone knows cameras are rolling  *  it's a room full of children * the boy's mom is standing off camera a few feet away watching all of this * the boy initiated contact, he had already had a hug with Dalai Lama earlier and then asked Dalai Lama for another hug which triggered this segment  17 min. video showing what happened before that 1 min. clip and after, with some explanation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT0qey5Ts78 16min talk from Ajahn Acalo with his thoughts on Dalai Lama kissing boy, relevance to Bhikkhu monastic code, sexual predators in religion in general, and how celibate monastics deal with sexual energy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK2m0TcUib0 The child's comments about the incident in a filmed interview later https://www.marca.com/en/lifestyle/world-news/2023/04/18/643eba5d46163ffc078b457c.html The child: It's a great experience It was amazing to meet His Holiness and I think it's a great ex