On giving Dhamma (back) to the heir and owner, the Sangha

[Dhammañāṇa]

To give - what one holds - to the Sangha is high meritious or? Does Nyom still see a fault in giving given Dhamma "back" to the Sangha, to object a share for the Sangha of it?

Supposed there where a person who had stolen books from a monastery, or put Dhamma under his ownership. Then one day, inspired, would give the Dhamma he had occupied to the Sangha. What does Nyom think, is the action of giving the Dhamma to the Sangha (back) of great merits?

[អរិយវង្ស]

Kana did not understand
Kana just think of would put the Dhamma book on the Proper time.

 

[Dhammañāṇa]

It's late. Good if reading the last post tomorrow Nyom.

[អរិយវង្ស]

 Kana Bhante_/\_

[អរិយវង្ស]

Kana Bhante

In the case kana parents passed away i kana not know exactly where from or whom..
But surely the Dhamma book was not stolen. Just not sure he bought,
or given by someone.. 

[Dhammañāṇa]

Ohh... why that overthinking? Nyoms case is clear here: just simple great merits done before her, and nothing wrong.

But now again: Supposed there where a person (who ever) who had stolen books from a monastery, or put Dhamma under his ownership before. Then, one day, inspired, would give the Dhamma-books, or rights, he had occupied, (back) to the Sangha. What does Nyom think, is the action of giving the Dhamma to the Sangha (back) of great merits?

Or a similar simile:
Supposed there is a person who kills a chicken for his meal. As he starts to prepare for eating a monk on alms come his way. Inspired, the person gives the chicken he just liked to eat the monk.
What does Nyom think: Is the deed of iving the chicken the monk to eat of great merits?

Audio in khmer

[អរិយវង្ស]

Kana Bhante 

In the action of Someone who had stolen sth or kills.. both are bad Kamma.

Then later he was generous given back the book or chichen for eaten a monk, in every moment
of inspired giving toward the Sangha still cause of the great merit.

 

[Dhammañāṇa]

Good.

And supposed there is a person who knows good and bad, thinking "I will kill a chicken for the Sangha, the merits gained are by far more then the demeritd", gives that chicken to a monk, thinking he will make much merits.
What does Nyom think, did he make merits?

[អរិយវង្ស]

Kana Bhante 

Depend on intention first, intention for make merit.
If he killed a checken for the Sangha he had bad intention first for make merit(ហេតុ) , 
so the action not became the merit(ផល).

 

[Dhammañāṇa]

Yes, Nyom Cheav Villa . What ever unskillful done for whom ever, still stays unskillful! Doing wrong for your mother, father, the King, the Buddha... your self, still drives one into hell. For it is not having abound doing wrong and holding wrong views.

As for a person calling himself a follower of the Buddha and doing wrong for the Tripple Gems, such is not only grave wrong view but fourfold wrong.

And because it is fourfold wrong: If a monk had seen, heard or thinks that it was based on wrongdoing for a monk, he isn't allowed to receive the gift.

As when it is a person not instructed at all, not knowing the Dhamma, if doing bad for a good, such is called mixed kamma.

Taking (unskillful, unlawful, harmful) to give is always wrong view and not what the Buddha taught, but leads upwardly.

[Dhammañāṇa]

And what is the fourth kamma, that works for ending of kamma?

There is the case where a disciple of the Noble Ones discerns: "The Buddha has declare that taking what is not given is wrong and leads to hell". I too had taken what is not given, and this was not good. So he stops taking of what is not given and resolves no more to do. Right here old kamma ends and no new kamma comes into existence.

There is the case where a person had taken Dhamma which hasn't been given by the owner. He had amassed it and but it under his or other domain. One day he reminds that taking what is not given leads downward. He stops, pardons, gives it back and resolves no more to take Dhamma that isn't given or make improper use. Right here his old kamma ends and no more new comes into existence.

This teachings of the Buddha aren't the doctrine of the Jains. "Papa and Punja have to go with each other.", although a beloved saying, it's the ideas of the Jain.

Sankha Sutta: The Conch Trumpet

[អរិយវង្ស]

 

Kana still not understand well...would call that a stolen just took the
Daddy book which he opened for a whole family to read or some could take as personally..
but whatever not sure to do kana would stop the action now.

 

[Dhammañāṇa]

Again Nyom, and it's good to ask to get 100% clear, since acting on doubt is akusala in any case (defuse, moha).

If one has gained possession on something, hold something as own, perceives it as own, yet gives it as gift, such is kusala.

If one does not own something, perceives it as somebody else, when taking on it without being given, that is taken what is not given, such is akusala.

And it would be still akusala if thinking "I take what is not given to give".

But yes, and that is why Atma nevertheless talks on. Doing something based on doubt is also akusala.

So again: Nyoms parents have died. They left their things behind for their children. Has Nyom any clear perception that the book was unrightly obtained by her parents. Is the book now Nyoms book? And does she not actually perceive "this has been given by the goodness of the Sangha, has been given by the goodness of my parents"?

[អរិយវង្ស]

Kana Bhante

Because of not sure (even i kana father known as always rejoice to sharea merit in general not only the Sangha,
People, animal..)
Althought just found he might receive the book from Wat Toul Sophea Khoun.

I kana would stop now.


user:cheav_villa:img20200105120025.jpg

  

[អរិយវង្ស]

 
I kana Just remind(but still not sure)  someday kana Mother gave me this book told
kana should read/remember it first not just only read the tapitaka or
another higher... ( kana left this book on the table, just look at it from last year to read
 the metta chanting..