0

What does one think, to reflect and investigate:

If a Bhikkhu would do efforts that finally lead to lose for at least a non-Bhikkhu (lay man, novice...), such would be easy a downfall transgression (if worthy the price of a pillow...).

What do you think if such happens with possessions within the internet realm? Say, for example, making efforts that someone loses access, loses possibility to use...blocked... what ever.

Say, a Bhikkhu hunts after you and gets you banned, disabled, deprived by this or that regional authority (equal if using law enforcement for a Non-Bhikkhus lose).

As there are many using common tools, like householder, incl. there inbuild weapons, it's something that touches many actually.

(Sure, it's possible to consider also other around, yet just in kammic sphere: lay person strives for lose of a monk).

2 Answers 2

0

Well, I suppose that access to an internet site is not a material possession -- and so it's not like a pillow.

And I don't know details of the situation you're asking about, but removing a user from a site (preventing their posting there) may be analogous to the Kesi Sutta: To Kesi the Horsetrainer (An 4.111)?

Also I wouldn't describe removing a user as using "weapons" -- maybe it is forceful, but it is non-violent -- like I think that a key and a lock on a door is not a "weapon", but a way to uninvite an unwelcome guest.

That's just my guess though, and I don't think it's my place to try to interpret the Vinaya for you!

2
  • Yes, who says? For interpret one 1. needs to know, second have arrided at such domain. And one who thinks Kesi is applying at least should be a trainer of own kind or one with 'childs'. Like most not good to nothing wise reflected. And access to almost all in regard of livelihood for many is spiritual... not material, hmm? Good to think what's all not mind. Householders, possession, money isn't 'material'?
    – user23341
    Jan 18 at 23:50
  • Although possible of long term benefit: To shut down BSE or at least drive out the mods here, would apply to householders idea, yet nevertheless likewise a downfall transgression by monks.
    – user23341
    Jan 18 at 23:58
0

There are circumstances where a group or a person might want exclude a member, would bring such exclusion up for consideration/arbitration and or would execute it.

It is a wrong-doing if either is done for no good reason.

The severity of the offense could be a trifle to a grave offense depending on the particulars of the situation.

It can also be a skillful action if such exclusion is warranted and would be beneficial.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.