Search results

Yours wouldn't approve such if seeing that what's your joy is many others pain. Wise therfore reflect their past beloves in the food. How, a little wise, would be delight if eating his own son?

To make ones mother responsible for bad habits, is like to claim a God's responsibility for one's good or bad. It's neither because mother, nor because of a super being, that one is a drinker, adulter, liar, thieve, murder... or a virtuous person.

Seemingly most mistake intoxication, and alcohol spirits, as their God, and beyond sensual world, letting them forget the huge abonds of debts and wrong. In common spirit, no, monks aren't using spirits. It's means toward low realms, and no serious religion approves intoxication since not even...

The Sublime Buddha, of course (and in further his Sangha of monks):

Yes, and if good householder would have gotten the teachings on anatta right, he wouldn't cherish mental sankhars, seeing them as anicca, no refuge, a cancer, not worth to regard them as own. It's called ditthi-anusaya: Obsesssion; underlying tendency, "laying down" with certain views, not being...

What "longsuffering"... in regard of some's spirit?

Maybe good householder thinks that being funny wouldn't matter, yet may he be insured that it does.

What hopless ideas...

The Sublime Buddha also told, those who had gone for refuge, that own ideas and preference as the lowest judges. Certain bad translations, of strangely just in revolutionary societies known, serves consume well, like other cheeries good householder picked out and steady slander the Juwels by his...

Who tell's such, good householder? The tongue and the belly or the add insertings? But probably not a little are that sense-desire is couse of a bad things.

...

It's certain not the Sublime Buddhas issue that good householder prefers Mara(na).

Talks on low topics, such as food, does actually bad. Better if believing and so doing good.

What a nonsensical assuming... but as told, books and especially wiki are even endurances to never gain relation to the Gems.

Somebody having taken the Sublime Buddha, the good Dhamma, the monastic community of monks as his refuge, is recognized as Upasaka, Upasika ("by-sitter", eg. lay follower). A person who as gained the stream, eg. seen the Dhamma, endowed with virtue, conductive for the path, pleasing to the Noble...

It's an obligation for Upasaka, Upasika, yet aside it's total free to do merits or not, and depends on wisdom to take on such. In no way does common society have any obligation or a rule to do such, unless maybe a wise King ordered such. Bhikkhus are also open to receive alms food at their...

Books are no teacher, and without relation, it's improper to call one a disciple. Cherrypicker would be more proper.

It's not possible, as long one hasn't left society and impure dependency, to live even the holly life, not to speak of developing the path. And it's nothing but strong craving, tanha, that argues that one has still task for the sake of birth, aging, sickness and death. And since there are only...

One could not take on the desires to become a Buddha if not meeting one. And one is certain foolish, if instead of listen to the right way, on very seldom occasion, when the good Dhamma is avaliable in the world, desires himself to gain the base of earning all merits... That's why no Buddha ever...

Most use all useful just for their own politics, to cherish defilments, yes. That gives them desired food to nourish unwise pride and ways for denying requirement of dependency. Seldom those with faith and using given strategies for battle the opposition within.