No. When it comes to lying, bad karma is not related to the actual truthfulness of what was said.
Rather, it comes from intention. Speaking the untruth intentionally is bad karma and a violation of one of the five precepts. Please see this answer for more details.
From Nibbedhika Sutta:
Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of
Those are two sentences. Perhaps the first is the statement and the second the analysis.
Also in the Pali it's a single compound word:
Mendicants, I shall teach you the analysis of a recitation passage.
uddesavibhaṅgaṁ vo, bhikkhave, desessāmi.
recitation, instruction; indication; brief indication, brief statement;
summary exposition instructing, ...
The recommendation is for lay persons to observe the Eight Precepts on Uposatha Days.
The Eight Precepts are included in the Ten Precepts, thus the Ten Precepts conform to the above recommendation.
So, there's no problem observing the Ten Precepts on Uposatha Days.
It's just like the case where monks need not do more than what is required by the Vinaya. But ...
You can find the Pali words on Sutta Central:
... saddho kāyassa bhedā paraṁ maraṇā sugatiṁ saggaṁ lokaṁ upapajjati ...
To answer your question, I think the text has been correctly translated. The translated word “breaks” corresponds to "bhedā". For this context see notes from the PTS:
"Abl. bhedā after the destruction or dissolution in ...
The commentary to Dhammapada 1 precisely addresses the topic of unintentionally killing insects:
On one occasion, Thera Cakkhupala (who was blind) came
to pay homage to the Buddha at
the Jetavana monastery. One night, while pacing up and down in
meditation, the thera accidentally stepped on some insects. In the
morning, some bhikkhus visiting the thera ...
From the MN 58 quote below, we see that the Buddha has a sense of proper time for saying things which are factual, true and beneficial.
So, we can only surmise that the Buddha gave a statement without its detailed analysis, to give the monks time to think about his statement, before explaining to them the detailed analysis at a proper time, later. Why is ...
It is a very important question. Accumulating merit.
If you can undo all your past wrong doings then that will accrue merit.
For example if you have lied in the past and now you have taken an oath to never lie again that brings merit.
If you have collected money by wrongful means and now if you decide to donate all your money then that brings merit.
If you ...
You should not say things which will turn out to be false or is false intentionally. However if you have said something which turned out to be false unintentionally then it is alright.
Honesty and integrity are the hallmarks of the followers of Buddha.
Sometimes a person is a pathological liar... he doesn’t know that he is lying... he believes that whatever ...
First, a disclaimer: I cannot give assurance that this answer is found in Theravada Buddhism, as your question is tagged, nor am I answering the question in the title. I am answering the question you pose at the end of your description: “Why didn’t he analyze the statement when he said he would?”
The Buddha said: “I will teach you a statement & its ...
He did analyze it. His exposition was to return to his hut and simply move on without being externally or internally bound. This is very similar to the Zen story about kicking over the water jug.
When Master Guishan was under Baizhang, he had the position of tenzo [cook]. Baizhang wanted to choose a master for Great Gui Mountain in the province of Konan. He ...