[Q&A] Breach of second precept (copyrights, Dhamma books)Breach of second precept
Is copying a Dhamma book in hard copy and converting it into a pdf to read on my kindle a breach of the second precept? I am planning only to read it myself and not give it to anyone.
I also thought that Dhamma material should be free. Why are people amongst them well known monks and nuns charging for dhamma material?
Venerable members of the Sangha,
walking in front Fellows in leading the holly life.
In Respect of the Triple Gems, Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, in Respect of the Elders of the community
, my person tries to answer this question. Please, may all knowledgeable Venerables and Dhammika, out of compassion, correct my person, if something is not correct and fill also graps, if something is missing.
Valued Upasaka, Upasika, Aramika(inis),
dear Readers and Visitors,
(This is a maybe modified and expanded answer of the "original" that can be found
here .)
-
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa -
take what is not given, is a break of the precept. Just prove that, possible ask the owner (giver), which is not wrong for householder to do and should be usual.
If it is not given, (free; or by a certain deal, you do not keep, can not keep) don't take it, make it.
In regard of "should be" and rights, demanting: that is lead by wrong view. It's not good to think so, and it would lead to either breaking the precept your self or to encourage others to do, which breaks the precept as well, is told so, and then done by others.
Root of wrong deeds or right deeds is view and resolve:
Unskillful Mental Action
"And how is one made impure in three ways by mental action? There is the case where a certain person is covetous. He covets the belongings of others, thinking, 'O, that what belongs to others would be mine!' He bears ill will, corrupt in the resolves of his heart: 'May these beings be killed or cut apart or crushed or destroyed, or may they not exist at all!' He has wrong view, is warped in the way he sees things: 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is how one is made impure in three ways by mental action.
Skillful Mental Action
"And how is one made pure in three ways by mental action? There is the case where a certain person is not covetous. He does not covet the belongings of others, thinking, 'O, that what belongs to others would be mine!' He bears no ill will and is not corrupt in the resolves of his heart. [He thinks,] 'May these beings be free from animosity, free from oppression, free from trouble, and may they look after themselves with ease!' He has right view and is not warped in the way he sees things: 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are brahmans & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is how one is made pure in three ways by mental action.
In regard of possibly doing not forwarding something (
stinginess or
business with Dhamma , eg. heavy goods of the Sangha), that's for this act "stealing" as well (even regardable as the biggest thief), in regard of Dhamma, since it has been not given for trade (has a heir, an owner). And if wasting away, or derive it from it's owner, if for example saying "it's free (to take) and owned by everyone" (e.g. compulsory purchase), it's a thief as well, if the owner loses his heritage.
But all that cases should be viewed from the does, actors side: one does good to look at ones own deeds, yet, it's not wrong to be compassioned and tell other: "Hey! Take care on you actions and protect yourself from bad results."
So on that account it's also good to reflect on ways when one is involved in thieving, makes use of unrightousness for ones own personal easy going.
That is why any kind of trade and Dhamma does not fit to each other,and is never able to transport it's meaning.
Maybe in addition, if taking seriously on trust, knowing the owner will be happy if you take and he/she is still alive, would be a "taking what is given", but as told, a short questing if so makes things more at ease.
Generally spoken and adviced: Neither selling nor buying Dhamma is in line with Dhamma-Vinaya and of long lasting benefit.
Also, taking and demanding of what is not given, or giving of what is not ones own or given to do so, e.g. stealing a gifts purpose, will always be troublesome and leads to poorness and bad states like all taking away, derive either possession, life, livelihood or even the truth.
As the Buddha told his disciples: better to eat hot iron balls (e.g. bear certain suffering or hardship) then to receive a gift given with strings (bond to the world) and not torward release and Nibbana.
It's generally importand to keep in mind that if something has been done wrong before such would allow to do wrong afterwards. There is a underlying extortion within it and this is the reason why corrupt ways, one taken on, easily become a usual. That is the reason why in some countries one is required to report capital wrong doings so to cut off ways to develop usuals from wrongs and gain benefit from the wrong deeds done by others in tolerating them, better taking part.
So one should not try to find gains in what is wrong, aprove it, thinking "I have a benefit from it and it's the action of someone else". While such thought would not cause a break of a precept on a conduct level in most cases, aprove mentaly is kammic not that different to do by ones own hand and leads to same results.
Anumodana!