Guest guest Posted July 28, 1999 Report Share Posted July 28, 1999 "COM: Mahanidhi (das) (S)" wrote: > [Text 2511328 from COM] > > > > Maybe, maybe not. But we still got to differentiate in between > > > charity and trade. Charity carries the good amount of personal > > > karma along (so you got to be very careful from whom to accept > > > it, and what exactly to do with it). The fair price given for > > > the goods is eliminating that particular aspect. > > > > And paying the blood subsidized market price for milk doesn't eliminate > > it. > > In the act of charity, the portion of a personal bad karma (or > sinful reactions) of the giver goes along with the gift to the > acceptor. Thus the transfer of personal karma is being done, from > one person to another. The giver gets freed from it, and the acceptor > gets "in charge" of it. So it is very dangerous to accept charity > from materialists, if you are going to use the donation for > yourself only. > > In the case of trade, this aspect is being eliminated. Though > you may claim the opposite, I see no philosophical base for such > understanding. Sorry. You said that the payment of the fair price eliminates the bad karma. The market price is not the fair price. Part of the price is paid for with the blood of the cow, and that is not fair. the fair price would include the cost of raising both the cow who gave the milk and her calf to a ripe old age. That is fair. And then I would agree with your premise that paying the fair price eliminates the karma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.